Author : Zenon Kelper
About a same person reappearing - as some would say "reincarnating" - we have Copernicus and Freud according to Lacan (that I believe was not a stupid idea, as I noted it in The Structure of the Discovery). The word "repetition" would be more contextual in this case - however, you may notice in this site an essay about "reincarnation."
Akhnaton, this is not at all what I mean. Many names may refer to his
historical presence. Hermes Trismegistus meant Moses,
but also Orpheus (the story of Orpheus who mary twice
and must hide his face matches the political wedding of a pharaoh)
- then the metamorphose of Orpheus in Oedipus is well shown by J.Cocteau
(Master of the Prieure de Sion) and its coincidence
with the Egyptological Akhnaton well depicted by Velikovsky.
Phaeton may be also a clear representation of Akhnaton, etc...
(see the essay re: above). What is remarkable with Akhnaton
is the demonstration that a repressed Subject reappears
under several names.
It points out the idea of a certain "Real" at the cause of our illusory world of representations. It was madness to expect success in deleting the initiator Akhnaton - but it has enabled people with ideologies, and absurd passions for heros and leaders; until the moment when this Real surfaces. In a very intriguing manner, this reappearance of the repressed surges while the biosphere acquire a knowledge of DNA. This is all the same question of the matter, consistency of the bodies, of the biological entities which influence the Earth.
century discovery of Akhnaton put us in a situation which may be compared
with the Renaissance. At that time mankind had to face the fact that the
celestial luminaries were bodies - today we must reckon our
idols, to identify some of them as historical bodies.
that the author who shows Akhnaton=Oedipus
honored Freud for Freud was "blocked" with Oedipus as himself was with Moses.
And the author who shows Akhnaton=Moses
repressed Oedipus who had obsessed him when he had been writing theater plays,
. The triple combination encounters resistances
who shows the identification of Trismegistus
as Moses, during the Renaissance, warned his students. The identification
must be complete - otherwise it is worth nothing - otherwise it is as
Narcissistic or Singular Psychoanalysis which leads nowhere but to
perversion or surmoisation (facism). For instance the sole Akhnaton=Moses
equality fails and drives warfare (see
About the quality of the historical evidence - if there are ever 'evidences' - the discoveries in the period of Egypt are perhaps the most documented in archeology. I draw a graph some times ago which evoques the concentration of information we have recently gathered from this period.
There again, I agree, all this do not refer directly to the Sinai event/religion - but I had to mention this context first.
Now we can look at Moses enigma - with mentioning Oedipus to begin:
who was so interested by the 'Oedipus Complex', repressed a
Oedipus-Akhnaton that his disciple K.Abraham suggested to him by 1912.
Freud never mentioned him, nor his hypothesis, in his further reports.
It is so blatant that even his docile disciples have regularly remarked and
questioned this repression.
I would like to make a note at this point. It is legitimate to consider Freud as a reference in this matter. For during half a century he has been the only one who has stated on the affair - though it is clear that the matter is serious enough for large and collective studies. Such a general silence combined with Freud isolation indicates a process regarding the collective psychology - so that Freud was 'charged' with an important point of view of the subject (right and/or false, yet certainly significant).
made exactly the same observation as you did. The difference was so big between
the mentality of the two religions (Atonism & Judaism) that
he could not imagine that the same man had delivered both. As I said, he
forgot well his Oedipus Complex transformative law. First Freud did
not mentioned that the leader of the Exodus could have been Akhnaton
himeself (it is remarkable that in thebook he wrote during
nearly 20years in his cabinet under his hudge poster of Ramses.2 (the
powerful pharaoh who organized the detetion of Akhnaton! See Quades
below) - he could not think of an Exile in Akhanton's case / though it
is blattant that Akhnaton disappeared, only the very recent
Egyptology admit that it was probably an exile).
Yet, the repression of the transformative Oedipus, and the silence on the possible exiled Akhnaton, is indicative that Freud was still repressing a lot with his Moses.
Today, we have the strict Egyptological report by Osman, stating Moses-Akhnaton. Egyptological events following the end of Amarna would be very difficult to explain is Akhnaton had died in Egypt and/or if he was not exiled. As I also mentioned in my page about Osman, when he declares that Akhnaton has been murdered during his exile by the Sinai - he had no indications, but wanted just to fit with Freud on that point.
You may have noticed that I have also written an essay which explores and suggests a pre-Hellenique influence in the set up of Atonism. This would explain how and why Akhnaton's exile had to (and could) reach as far as the pre-Aegean area. It explains enough that a missing character of Atonism had been kept in Greece while protected by the ferocious figure of the Hebrew wagging the dog(1) (the very strategy, by the way, depicted in _Oedipus_at_Colonus_ when leaving his first exile stage - sort of "Let them beleive that I am dead and that they have changed my God, so we can quietly continue the work in the woods)" ...
NOTE (1) If you allow for my poor English the help of this contemporary metaphore...
END OF THE PAGE
EXCHANGE IDEAS, IMPROVE KNOWLEDGE
Registration to a
time $15 fee
All transactions are secured
© William Theaux 1949-1999