+Broken Offerings,+ _e.g._ figurines, models, and other articles, when
found deposited in tombs, have been explained in the light of
comparative custom as destroyed or 'killed' to the end that their
'soul' may accompany that of the deceased. But other ideas are
evidently involved when the area of the sanctuary at Serabit proved to
be covered with a mass of pottery, plaques, bracelets, wands, sistra,
etc., so fragmentary that no single specimen could be pieced together.
At Gezer, also, although the plaques of the goddess were fairly tough,
all had been broken, and apparently with intention. We may compare the
modern custom of breaking pottery in fulfilment of a {46} vow, an
interesting illustration of which was furnished by the late Professor
Curtiss from Bludan on the road from Zebedany to Damascus. At a spot,
familiarly known as the 'mother of pieces,' is a rock-platform with
cave, shrine, sacred grove and hereditary ministers. Hither come the
women to break a jar when they have gained their one wish, and it is
singular to observe that the traditions which are attached to the
custom include the belief that a girl, the patroness of the shrine,
lies buried there. The likeness to the suggested rites at Gezer will
be noticed (p. 37). But the stories do not elucidate the peculiar
treatment of the offerings, and the usage finds its most probable
explanation in the persuasion that things once dedicated or put to a
sacred use are 'holy,' and cannot be used for ordinary purposes. We
touch upon a fundamental institution embodying a series of apparently
paradoxical ideas--the universal 'tabu.'
+'Holy' and 'Unclean.'+--The terms Holy or Sacred (comp. the Latin
_sacer_) are not to be understood in the ethical or moral sense. A
holy thing is one which has been set aside, dedicated, or restricted;
it is charged with supernatural influence which is contagious;
everything {47} that comes in contact with it also becomes holy. In
some cases it is provided that this inconvenient sanctity may be
purged; in others, the thing has to be destroyed. When the Talmud says
that a Canonical Book of the Old Testament 'defiles' the hand, it means
that the very sanctity of the book demands that the hand should be
ceremonially purified or cleansed before touching anything else. 'Holy
and unclean things,' to quote Robertson Smith, 'have this in common,
that in both cases certain restrictions lie on men's use of and contact
with them, and that the breach of these restrictions involves
supernatural dangers. The difference between the two appears, not in
their relation to man's ordinary life, but in their relation to the
gods. Holy things are not free to man, because they pertain to the
gods; uncleanness is shunned, according to the view taken in the higher
Semitic religions, because it is hateful to the god, and therefore not
to be tolerated.'
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account