Dark Germanic Heathenism Code Of Law

The language of illnesshas been typicalof the debate on the Mosaic dis- tinction,from its beginning up to the days of Sigmund Freud.

We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship.

For more information about JSTOR, please contact supportjstor.org..University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toRepresentations.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Mon, 10 Jun 2013 17:24:03 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and ConditionsJANASSMANN The Mosaic Distinction: Israel, Egypt,and the Invention of Paganism Draw a distinction.

I T S E E M S A S I F G E O R G E Spencer BrownsfirstLaw of Construction does not apply solely to the logical and mathematicalconstructionforwhich it is meant.

It also applies strangelywell to the space of cultural constructionsand distinctionsand to the spaces thatare severed or cloven by such distinctions.

The distinctionwithwhichthisessayis concerned is the one between true and false in religion: a distinctionthatunderlies the more specificones betweenJews and Gentiles,Christiansand pagans, Muslimsand unbelievers.Once thisdistinc- tion is drawn,there is no end of reentriesor subdistinctions.We startwithChris- tians and pagans and end up withCatholics and Protestants,Calvinistsand Lu- therans,Socinians and Latitudinarians,and a thousand similar denominations and subdenominations.These culturalor intellectualdistinctionsconstructa uni- verse thatis fullnot onlyof meaning,identity,and orientationbut also of conflict, intolerance,and violence.

Therefore, there have always been attemptsto over- come the conflictby reexaminingthe true-falsedistinction,albeit at the risk of losing culturalmeaning.

Let us call the distinctionbetween true and false in religionthe Mosaic dis- tinctionbecause traditionascribesitto Moses.

Whilewe cannotbe sure thatMoses ever lived, since there are no other traces of his earthlyexistence outside the legendary tradition,we can be sure, on the other hand, that he was not the first to draw the distinction.There was a precursorin the person of the Egyptianking Amenophis IV, who called himselfAkhenaten and instituteda monotheisticre- ligion in the fourteenthcenturyB.C.2His religion,however,created no lasting traditionand was forgottenimmediatelyafterhis death.

Moses is a figureof mem- ory,but not of history,whereas Akhenatenis a figureof history,but not of mem- ory.

Since memory is all that counts in the sphere of cultural distinctionsand constructions,we are justifiedin speaking not of Akhenatensdistinctionbut of the Mosaic distinction.The space severed or clovenby thisdistinctionis the space of Westernmonotheism.It is the mental and cultural space constructedby this distinctionthatEuropeans have inhabitedfor nearlytwo millennia.

REPRESENTATIONS56Fall 1996 (C THEREGENTSOFTHEUNIVERSITYOFCALIFORNIA This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Mon, 10 Jun 2013 17:24:03 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and ConditionsThis distinctionis not as old as religion itself,though at firstsight it might seem plausible to say thateveryreligionproduces pagans just as everyciviliza- tion generates barbarians.But culturesand theirconstructionsof identitynot only generate othernessbut also develop techniques of translation.3Of course, the real other is alwaysthere beyond myselfand my constructionsof selfhood and otherness.It is the constructedother thatis, to a certaindegree, compen- sated by techniquesof translation.Translationin thissense is not to be confused withthe colonializingappropriationof the real other.Rather,it is an attemptto make more transparentthe borders erected by culturaldistinctions.

Ancientpolytheismsfunctionedas such a technique of translationwithinthe ancientworld as an ecumene of interconnectednations.4The polytheisticreli- gions overcame the ethnocentrismof tribal religions by distinguishingseveral deitiesby name, shape, and function.The names, the shapes of the gods, and the formsof worshipdiffered.But the functionswere strikinglysimilar,especiallyin the case of cosmic deities: the sun god of one religionwas easily equated to the sun god of another religion,and so forth.In Mesopotamia, the practiceof trans- latingdivine names goes back to the thirdmillennium.In the second millennium it was extended to many differentlanguages and civilizationsof the Near East.

Because all people live in the same world, theyadore the same gods, the lords of thisworld: Nor do we regardthe gods as differentamongdifferentpeoplesnor as barbarianand Greekand as southernand northern.Butjustas thesun,moon,heaven,earthand sea are commonto all, thoughtheyare givenvariousnamesbythevaryingpeoples,so it is with theone reason(logos)whichordersthesethingsand theone providencewhichhas charge ofthem,and theassistantpowerswhichareassignedtoeverything:theyare givendifferent honoursand modesofaddressamongdifferentpeoplesaccordingtocustom,and theyuse hallowedsymbols.5 Thedivine names are translatablebecause they are conventional and because there is always a referentserving as a tertiumcomparationis.Thecultures, lan- guages, customsmay be different:religionsalwayshave a common ground.

The gods were internationalbecause theywere cosmic, and while differentpeoples worshiped differentgods, nobody contestedthe realityof foreigngods and the legitimacyof foreignformsof worship.The distinctionin question did not exist in the world of polytheisticand tribalreligions.

The space severed or cloven by the Mosaic distinctionwas not simplythe space of religionin general, then,but thatof a veryspecifickind of religion.We may call thisa counterreligionbecause it not onlyconstructedbut rejected and repudiated everythingthatwent before and everythingoutside itselfas pagan- ism.

It no longer functionedas a means of interculturaltranslation;on the con- The MosaicDistinction49 This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Mon, 10 Jun 2013 17:24:03 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditionstrary,itfunctionedas a means of interculturalestrangement.Whereas polytheism or rather,cosmotheism,rendered differentculturesmutuallytransparentand compatible, the new counterreligionblocked interculturaltranslatability.False gods cannot be translated.

Usually the fundamentaldistinctionbetween truthand falsityassumes the form of a grand narrativeunderlyingand informinginnumerable concrete tellingsand retellingsof the past.

Books 2 through 5 of the Pentateuch unfold the Mosaic distinctionin both a narrativeand a normativeform.Narratively,the distinctionis presented in the storyof Israels exodus, wherebyEgypt came to representthe rejected,thereligiouslyfalse,thepagan.

Egyptsmostconspicuous property,the worship of images, thus became its greatestsin.

Dark Germanic Heathenism Code Of Law

Normatively,the distinctionis expressed in a code of Law thatconfirmsthe narrativeby givingthe prohibitionof idolatryfirstpriority.The worship of images comes to be re- garded as the absolute horror,falsehood,and apostasy.Polytheismand idolatry, in turn,are seen as one and the same formof religiouserror: images are other gods because the true god is invisibleand cannot be iconicallyrepresented.The second commandmentis hence a commentaryon the first: 1.

Thou shalthaveno othergodsbeforeme.

TheExodus story,however,is more than simply an account of historical events,and the Law is more than merelya basis for social order and religious purity.In addition to what theyovertlytelland establish,theysymbolizethe Mo- saic distinction.Exodus, the Law, Moses, the whole constellationof Israel and Egyptare symbolicfiguresforall kindsof oppositions.6The leading one, however, is the distinctionbetweentruereligionand idolatry;in thecourse ofJewishhistory both the concept of idolatryand the repudiation of it grew stronger.The later the texts,the more elaborate the scorn and abominationtheypour over the idol- aters.

Remarkablyenough, most of them were Egyptians.8Thepriest Manetho, for example, who under PtolemyII wrote a historyof Egypt,represented Moses as a rebellious Egyptianpriestwho made himselfthe leader of a colony of lepers.9 Whereas the Jews depicted idolatryas a kind of mental aberrationor madness, the Egyptiansassociated iconoclasm witha verycontagious and disfiguringepi- demic.

Dark Germanic Heathenism Pdf