<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Akhenaten Worshipper of the Sun. Indeed, no.
Review: Amenhotep, later Pharaoh Akhenaten, has been called a "worshipper of the sun" by a recent reviewer. Surely he was not. National Geographic (April 2001) quotes him as saying: "Oh living Aten, who initiates life.... Oh, sole god, without another beside him! You create the Earth according to your wish.... You are in my heart, and there is none who knows you except your son." It is said that he spoke these words as the Sun rose. But is he a worshipper of the outer, physical Sun or the inner, spiritual Sun, that is ultimately God? Who has initiated life? God the Father has. Does not the Upanishads, which predates Akhenaten, say that "the whole universe came forth from [God] and moves in [God]"? (Prabhavavanda and Manchester, Upanishads, 23. The Sanskrit word used is "Brahman.") Who is the sole god, without another beside him? The Heavenly Father is One without a second, is He not? Is there any difference between what Akhenaten said and what Isaiah said?" I am God, and there is none else." (Isaiah 5:22.) Or Shankara: "[God] alone is real. There is none but He." (Prabhavananda and Isherwood, Crest-Jewel of Discrimination, 69.) Surely what Akhenaten is saying is that only God exists; there are not two in the universe, but only One. "Hear, Oh Israel, the Lord thy God. The Lord is One." Did He not create the Earth (and the heavens) according to His wish? Said Solomon: "The Lord ... hath founded the earth." (Proverbs 3:19.) Said Shankara: "[God] is the cause of the evolution of the universe, its preservation and its dissolution." (CJD, 75-6.) Does He not reside in the heart of each being as the Immortal Self? Krishna declares: "The Lord lives in the heart of every creature." (Prabhavavanda and Isherwood, Bhagavad-Gita, 129.) Or the Upanishads: "The Supreme Person, ... the Innermost Self, dwells forever in the heart of all beings."(Upanishads, 24.) And where is the difference between saying that "there is none who knows you except your son" and saying, with Jesus, "no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son." (Luke 9:22.) This same Son, this Christ, this Pearl of great price and treasure buried in a field -- is not this the immortal Self, the Son of God? When Akhenaten says, "I shall make [the royal city of] Akhetaten for the Aten, my father, in this place," is he referring to his earthly father or to his Heavenly Father, whom he revered? I submit that Pharoah Akhenaten was an enlightened man, who had knowledge of the Heavenly Father through mystical insight, as all the world's saints and sages have had. He had this experience, as they all did, when the Inner Sun of the Self arose, not on the earthly horizon, but on the inner horizon of the heart. The religion that he initiated, which was overthrown after his death, was the worship of the same Heavenly Father that all mystics and masters through eternity have reverenced. Seeing him in this way eliminates the difficulties inherent in casting him as a mere worshipper of the Sun and restores to him his true accomplishment: he fulfilled the purpose of life -- to realize God. That his contemporaries did not give him his due is unfortunate. But, with the benefit of thousands of years of spiritual learning, we have the opportunity to set that unfortunate circumstance straight and give Akhenaten his true place in history, along with such other enlightened mystics as Solomon, Socrates, Jesus, and Buddha.
Rating:
Summary: Akhenaten Worshipper of the Sun. Indeed, no.
Review: Amenhotep, later Pharaoh Akhenaten, has been called a "worshipper of the sun" by a recent reviewer. Surely he was not. National Geographic (April 2001) quotes him as saying: "Oh living Aten, who initiates life.... Oh, sole god, without another beside him! You create the Earth according to your wish.... You are in my heart, and there is none who knows you except your son." It is said that he spoke these words as the Sun rose. But is he a worshipper of the outer, physical Sun or the inner, spiritual Sun, that is ultimately God? Who has initiated life? God the Father has. Does not the Upanishads, which predates Akhenaten, say that "the whole universe came forth from [God] and moves in [God]"? (Prabhavavanda and Manchester, Upanishads, 23. The Sanskrit word used is "Brahman.") Who is the sole god, without another beside him? The Heavenly Father is One without a second, is He not? Is there any difference between what Akhenaten said and what Isaiah said?" I am God, and there is none else." (Isaiah 5:22.) Or Shankara: "[God] alone is real. There is none but He." (Prabhavananda and Isherwood, Crest-Jewel of Discrimination, 69.) Surely what Akhenaten is saying is that only God exists; there are not two in the universe, but only One. "Hear, Oh Israel, the Lord thy God. The Lord is One." Did He not create the Earth (and the heavens) according to His wish? Said Solomon: "The Lord ... hath founded the earth." (Proverbs 3:19.) Said Shankara: "[God] is the cause of the evolution of the universe, its preservation and its dissolution." (CJD, 75-6.) Does He not reside in the heart of each being as the Immortal Self? Krishna declares: "The Lord lives in the heart of every creature." (Prabhavavanda and Isherwood, Bhagavad-Gita, 129.) Or the Upanishads: "The Supreme Person, ... the Innermost Self, dwells forever in the heart of all beings."(Upanishads, 24.) And where is the difference between saying that "there is none who knows you except your son" and saying, with Jesus, "no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son." (Luke 9:22.) This same Son, this Christ, this Pearl of great price and treasure buried in a field -- is not this the immortal Self, the Son of God? When Akhenaten says, "I shall make [the royal city of] Akhetaten for the Aten, my father, in this place," is he referring to his earthly father or to his Heavenly Father, whom he revered? I submit that Pharoah Akhenaten was an enlightened man, who had knowledge of the Heavenly Father through mystical insight, as all the world's saints and sages have had. He had this experience, as they all did, when the Inner Sun of the Self arose, not on the earthly horizon, but on the inner horizon of the heart. The religion that he initiated, which was overthrown after his death, was the worship of the same Heavenly Father that all mystics and masters through eternity have reverenced. Seeing him in this way eliminates the difficulties inherent in casting him as a mere worshipper of the Sun and restores to him his true accomplishment: he fulfilled the purpose of life -- to realize God. That his contemporaries did not give him his due is unfortunate. But, with the benefit of thousands of years of spiritual learning, we have the opportunity to set that unfortunate circumstance straight and give Akhenaten his true place in history, along with such other enlightened mystics as Solomon, Socrates, Jesus, and Buddha.
Rating: 
Summary: Debunks all the nonsense about Akhenaten being enlightened
Review: Excellent. Pretty well debunks all the nonsense about Akhenaten being an enlightened monarch. Without making any claims to be the last word on the topic -- let's face it, there's not so much hard information out there -- it paints a convincing picture of an antisocial egomaniac who subjected his people to his whims, some of which involved standing in the Saharan sun for hours on end. Although it's a scholarly book, and necessarily a little dry at times, some of Redford's observations and comments on the available evidence are quite amusing.
Rating:
Summary: Refreshingly blunt and down-to-Earth.
Review: For once, it was nice to have Akhenaten seen as something other than a benevolent man who was before both his time and religion. Dr. Redford reveals that opposed to being a monotheist, Akhenaten was more of an aethiest as there was no real religion--backed up by mythology, which even Chrisitianity has--behind the concept of the Aten. Through the eyes of Dr. Redford, the Heretic becomes a man worth loathing, one who inforced too harshly or didn't inforce at all and for the most part did just leave the empire to rot. Needless to say, if you are an Amarnan Romantic, this book probably shouldn't be your first choice. However, it does pay to see one's subject in many different ways so that one is better able to form their own view. The discussion of the Amarna Temple Project was wonderous,and many of the admirable plates feature reconstructed talatat scenes. It is also revealed that the blocks were not as intentionally brutalized as previously believed. Akhenaten is brutalized slightly in this book, I will admit, but such is the fate of any Heretic, no matter their place in history or their behavior in forming that same history.
Rating: 
Summary: PURE VENOM!!
Review: I am sorry but as a decent and self respecting human being, (and to put it nicely, too), I am permenantly allergic to this book. Akhenaten is my absolute hero and I don't know where these people who detract from him including in this work think they'll get off taking untruthful and cheap shots at him. Obviously, they are afraid to look further into the sheer beauty and kindness which radiates from both him and his brilliant poetry. I think that if they decided to open their minds and look further, they would suddenly see the startling lovliness of this man. But this book is just cruel far beyond the edge of decency, though this author obviously isn't stupid, as he projects onto so many other fine people. I give it one star only because there isn't a zero, so this is the lowest.
Rating:
Summary: Akenaten was a good person
Review: I don't agree with most of the things in this book. I still think Akenaten's Amarna was en- lighting and he was far ahead of his peers at the time. Of course he was not perfect, but he did give Egypt the light.
Rating:
Summary: The worst book on this historical period ever written
Review: I'm a scholar in the Amarna Period and I have read almost every book about this period. This is absolutely the worst. And this is a pity since it doesn't do justice to its author who is a famous egyptologist. It seems that here Redford wants to discharge all his personal hate towards the period and the characters under discussion. This is certainly not the best book to start with if a layman is interested seriously to start and begin with Amarna studies.
Rating:
Summary: informative book about Akhenaten
Review: The author portrays Akhenaten more as an atheist than a monotheist. A striking portrait is an outline of this fascinating 'worshiper of the sun', who is also one of the best known pharaohs. A good overview is provided of the Akhenaten Temple Project. Some of the author's comments are amusing which makes the book more enjoyable especially through the 'dry' moments. The book contains a short glossary, suggested readings, and many black and white illustrations and drawings. It is recommended for the open-minded lay person.
<< 1 >>
|
