Q&A: The Tales of Gilgamesh
The Tales of Gilgamesh
Question
What do you think about the somewhat suspicious correspondence between the story of Noah and the Flood and the stories of King Gilgamesh that were found in the Mesopotamian region and are dated to around 2100 BCE?
"Gilgamesh asks Utnapishtim to tell him how he received eternal life from the gods, and Utnapishtim grants his request and tells him the story of the Flood. According to his account, the gods, led by Anu and Enlil, decided to bring a flood upon the world. The god Ea told Utnapishtim about the plan, commanded him to build a great boat and bring onto it 'the seed of every living creature,' and to tell the people of his city that he had to leave, but not to tell them about the coming flood. Utnapishtim does as commanded and even receives help from the people of his city. He brings onto the boat his family, his property, craftsmen, and every living being. A fierce storm breaks out according to the plan of the gods, lasts six days, and subsides on the seventh day. The boat comes to rest on the summit of Mount Nisir, and after seven days Utnapishtim sends out a dove, which finds no resting place and returns. Following that, he sends out a swallow, which also returns, and finally he sends out a raven, which does not return. Utnapishtim sends all the inhabitants of the boat out into the world and offers sacrifices to the gods. Enlil is angry that Utnapishtim survived the flood and proposes destroying humankind, but Ea calms him and persuades him to abandon the plan. Instead, Ea proposes punishing only the sinners. Enlil is convinced and even blesses Utnapishtim and his wife, grants them eternal life, and settles them at the 'mouth of the rivers.'[8] Utnapishtim tells Gilgamesh that the eternal life he was granted belongs to him alone, and proves this to Gilgamesh by testing whether he can stay awake for seven days. Gilgamesh falls asleep and sinks into a deep sleep for six days, and as a result recognizes his weakness and his inability to attain eternal life. Utnapishtim instructs Urshanabi to prepare Gilgamesh for the journey back to Uruk, but his wife takes pity on Gilgamesh and suggests telling him about the wondrous plant. Utnapishtim tells Gilgamesh about a plant that can prolong his days, and Gilgamesh dives into the depths and plucks the plant. On the way back, Gilgamesh bathes in a well and leaves the plant unattended; a passing serpent eats the flower and sheds its skin. Gilgamesh laments the loss of his last chance to attain eternal life, but in the end comes to terms with it and returns to Uruk."
Answer
This matter has already been discussed here in the past (search here for "Flood" and "Gilgamesh"). In general, when there are two different testimonies about the same events, that strengthens the claim that they indeed occurred, and certainly does not weaken it. So I do not see why an explanation is required. On the contrary, the question is how those who think the Flood never happened explain this.
Discussion on Answer
Haim, that's a completely different question. It too has already been discussed here in the past.
Could you provide a link to an article or discussion on the subject?
Here is an article: https://www.knowingfaith.co.il/%D7%9E%D7%A7%D7%A8%D7%90-%D7%95%D7%90%D7%A8%D7%9B%D7%99%D7%90%D7%95%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%92%D7%99%D7%94/%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%A7%D7%A8%D7%90-%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%96%D7%A8%D7%97-%D7%94%D7%A7%D7%93%D7%95%D7%9D-%D7%97%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%91%D7%99-%D7%92%D7%9C%D7%92%D7%9E%D7%A9-%D7%95%D7%94%D7%AA%D7%A0-%D7%9A
And on the Ratzio site: https://rationalbelief.org.il/%d7%a1%d7%99%d7%a4%d7%95%d7%a8-%d7%94%d7%91%d7%a8%d7%99%d7%90%d7%94-%d7%95%d7%94%d7%9e%d7%91%d7%95%d7%9c-%d7%94%d7%a9%d7%a4%d7%a2%d7%94-%d7%91%d7%91%d7%9c%d7%99%d7%aa/
And here on the site: https://mikyab.net/%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%AA/%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%91%D7%95%D7%9C-%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%A1-%D7%95%D7%90%D7%92%D7%93%D7%94
And another: https://mikyab.net/%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%AA/%D7%A1%D7%99%D7%A4%D7%95%D7%A8-%D7%AA%D7%99%D7%91%D7%AA-%D7%A0%D7%97
I think there are more here on the site.
The article on Ratzio is simply nonsense. And it's not the first time they've been caught distorting things and presenting half-truths.
The Flood is mentioned explicitly in the story even without any need for Andrew George. All researchers agree that this is about a flood, and there are references in other versions of it as well.
Besides, there are more myths, some regional ones about floods, so according to their approach they'd need to debunk several more stories and show that there too there was no flood.
What they're doing could also be done with the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) and the apocryphal books, and would in effect undermine all the principles of faith and the tradition of the Sages.
At least this time they answered substantively and didn't attack (relatively speaking), unlike some of their other articles where half of it is personal attacks on the writer.
I'd suggest taking what they say with a grain of salt after the organization behind them (Arachim) has been caught more than once in lies and distortions.
And the reason for the destruction of the city also has nothing to do with the matter. After all, we're talking about a myth. They don't really believe in gods who warn human beings, or in a plant that grants eternal life.
Beyond that, all geologists in the world think there was no global flood at all. So according to their approach, the Flood story also never happened.
The conclusions they draw are just bizarre.
Just one small problem: Ratzio didn't write an article; it copied an article from Beit Mikra.
And it noted in a footnote that some disagree with it.
Elsewhere it actually supports the parallels.
Here: https://rationalbelief.org.il/%D7%99%D7%98-%D7%96%D7%9E%D7%9F-%D7%9B%D7%AA%D7%99%D7%91%D7%AA-%D7%94%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%94-7-%D7%99%D7%93%D7%A2-%D7%94%D7%99%D7%A1%D7%98%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%99-%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%99%D7%9B%D7%95%D7%9D-2/
Kobi, geologists also claim there was a flood. (Apparently not on a global scale.)
A flood or a local natural disaster doesn't change the story. Ratzio (apparently) and the traditional interpretation claim that there was a worldwide flood, as is stated explicitly in Scripture, and that's also how tradition relates to it.
A global flood could not have happened for so many reasons. Starting with the enormous pressure that would have erased entire remains from periods before the Flood, and continuing with what David said: gathering all the animals from all the continents and bringing them into a small ark is practically impossible, certainly for a person from the ancient Near East.
In addition, there is so much evidence of cultures that continued to exist continuously, and that contradicts the possibility of a global flood.
To interpret it as a local flood is a strained and innovative interpretation. I find it hard to believe that a site that supports a fundamentalist traditional interpretation like Ratzio would support that interpretation (by the way, Rabbi Michi was also attacked there, albeit with some reservation, because he doesn't support the classic traditional interpretation).
In my opinion, the interpretation of Knowing Faith is the most reasonable, especially since in practice it doesn't really matter whether there was a flood or not, or whether it was local or global.
On second thought, there actually is a halakhic problem here. If not all of humanity came from Noah's descendants, then maybe not all of humanity is obligated in the seven Noahide commandments. And even if we say that Adam was commanded in them, that doesn't include the prohibition of eating a limb from a living animal.
Could it be that there are peoples for whom it's permitted to eat a limb from a living animal? Maybe the Chinese or the Indians?
Here is the expanded article on the Flood (which was not global, and yet is described that way because of the psychological impact stories like it left on humanity as a whole): https://www.knowingfaith.co.il/%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%94-%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%93%D7%A2/%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%91%D7%95%D7%9C
Kobi, if there was a flood (and I emphasize if there was), it could be that there were many more cultures that were destroyed and only a small part remained that came out from Noah. It could also be that they had advanced technology and that Noah was the head of humanity, so it's practically possible. It could also be that God brought the animals to the entrance of the ark and then returned them to where they had been. As for the pressure, how do you know everything would have been erased? And who said all the water had to be at the height of the highest mountains? It could be that in every place the water was 5 meters above the ground. Anyway, I'd be happy to see the mathematical calculation that the pressure would erase everything (although it's certainly possible that some things were erased).
Hello,
What about the story of Enoch with the extraterrestrial Watchers of the heavens?
The question is whether a worldwide flood that covered even the highest mountains is possible at all. And how could a person from the ancient Near East have managed to get all the way to the ends of the earth in order to bring animals into the ark from different continents?
And how could there have been cultures that existed before the Flood and continued to exist continuously afterward?
In my opinion, it isn't possible. And in light of the connections between Mesopotamian culture and other cultures in the ancient Near East, there is a high probability that this was a myth that spread and was accepted among the peoples of the region. But maybe there are arguments that manage to explain it.