Talk:Ma'at

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Egyptology Portal This article is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Egyptological subjects. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information).
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale.

Contents 1 42 Confessions vs. 147 Confessions 2 Miscellaneous 3 Confessions 4 Requested move 4.1 Survey 4.2 Discussion

[edit] 42 Confessions vs. 147 Confessions

I have found several sources, including from Yosef A.A. ben-Jochannan, that states that their are 147 Negative Confessions. I think this needs to be clairifed.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.152.26.141 (talk) 14:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Miscellaneous

This page says that souls were weighed against Maat, who was represented as a feather, but the page on Duat says that souls were weighed against just a feather. Was the feather Maat herself or did Maat have a feather or is it sometimes one way and sometimes another?

Maat was a seperate entity I believe, although she and the feather represented the same things: truth and justice. Maat possessed the feather.-ka

What is the pronunciation of Maat ? Skyarrow 15:36, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I do believe that Budge suggests that feather is Ma'at, but of course think of Ma'at as an ideal, not a physical being with physical weight.

And I am not completely sure the pronunciation, but I'm trying to figure that out. I'm lead to believe by the book I'm reading (they don't explain the sounds very well) it would be pronounced Mah-uht. I'm going to check the phonetics later on Wiki.

KV 16:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's suggesting consonant sounds for both a's which isn't what I read, so that was no help. I can tell you that it has the first a described as "glottal stop, like Cockney 'bo' 'le' for 'bottle'." and the second "like trying to say 'ah' while swallowing. Made by clenching the throat muscles to imitate, say 'a/o' with finger on the throat." I had them backwards originally, so it's more like "muh-aht". Also, the first "Called aleph. Originally a throaty trill, it later became a stop, as in cockney pronunciation of bottle as bo'l, and a hat as a 'a' ." and the second "Called ayin. A throaty gurgle, like saying a whilst swallowing."

KV 16:47, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

The Shu-Feather, and Maát, are interchangeable, and the principle, which extended for centuries, actually millenia, was (I am sure), a principle tied with the Role, and Authority of the Pharaoh.

An explanatory example: On the belts of Pharaoh's statues is their cartouche, with their Prenomen. The favorite, for me, and I think the most revealing, or Loftiest-in-Goal, is: Men,Kheper,Re. The meaning is as follows: Men, "Steadfastness", Permanence, Solidity;...."Kheper", the Scarab-beetle, for 'Transformation' , "becoming", and "Re", or "Ra", the Sun, but really: the Life-giving force to the Growth-0f-Crops, the animals grazing, etc.

So... MenKneperRe, Becomes ..."Steadfastly becoming like Ra", quite a lofty goal for any human, much less the leader of a People.

The point I want to get at is that "Maát" , is represented on the the "Ceremonial" Scarabs of Thutmose III, thus: Maat is the seated "Goddess" with the Shu feather on her head for identification, but on her Knee, at 60 degree angle (or whatever), is the Ankh. When you put all these "High" principles together, the Ankh, Maát. the 'She-feather'–of-truth, the Pharaoh, and Kheper, always trying to be better: Transformation. .....All I have to say, is, Thank goodness they were working in Stone, etc. Michael inHotDesertArizonaYUMA,Az--Mmcannis 04:20, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Confessions

Why was the list of confessions changed like they are now? Before, when it was "Thou shalt not ..." it was much easier to read and understand. I realise that they originally say "I have not..." but even then it's easier than it is now, with the extra bit at the beginning of each line. I've generally only seen it on sites written in the first two ways I've mentioned. --WolferGiga 14:43, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Good question. It wasn't discussed, so I've restored the latest version of the original list, which is more appropiate for this context. -999 (Talk) 15:48, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Interesting. An anonymous user has removed the list and put up a link to a site that the user says has an outdated translation. Perhaps people should give their reasons here for changes to the list of confessions. It is a majour part of Maát. I believe the list should be put back on the page, but also with an explaination that it is not the only list, and it's usually written as a post-mortem list in first person, such as "I have not...".--WolferGiga 16:56, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

It was changed when I discovered that the actual source cited no less made it clear that the actual statements were negative affirmations. The deceased said that they didn't do those things, but nowhere was it stated "thou shalt not". That was changed to make it more understandable to the audience, but to quote them as such would disagree with the source and be inaccurate.

KV(Talk) 00:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Not really. Changing "I have not..." to "Thou shalt not..." doesn't really change the meaning of the confessions. It just changes the speaker and timeframe (post-mortem to pre-mortem). Like I said, "I have not..." would make sense too, just that when I made my first comment, there were long references to gods before each line. It would have no real meaning to people that were just looking for the confessions. And also, originally there was a line explaining that normally they are said in post-mortem "I have not..." instead of the posted "Thou shalt not...". But either way, having them listed as negative confessions is still good. The majour thing I'm worried about is making the confessions overly complicated and long, which could lead to misunderstanding them. --WolferGiga 02:18, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

After looking at the list, it looks good how it is right now. --WolferGiga 02:23, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

That's what I was attempting to do in the transfer. Create the original, in the original context, without making it harder to understand.

KV(Talk) 16:45, 21 July 2006 (UTC)