Introduction
Traditional myths represent, express, and explore the notion of the people about themselves in their essential qualities and specifics. As a result, the study of myth is crucial to understanding particular communities and human society. The legends of Utanapishtim, Manu, Noah, and Nuh’s Ark are examples of flood myths passed down through numerous civilizations and religious traditions.
In each tale, a massive flood decimates the planet, and a selected man is instructed to build an ark to save himself, his family, and several animals from the flood. These arks are similar in their narrative but reflect different cultures and their values entrenched into their hidden message and overall impact.
Overview of the Flood Myths
The flood myths are revealed in the critical scriptures of different religions. For example, the Old Testament contains Noah’s account. In this narrative, to purge the planet of bad people, God planned to unleash a massive flood, while to protect them from the deluge, Noah was told to construct an ark and bring “two animals from each into it” (Holy Bible, Genesis 6-9).
Manu, the Hindu version of Noah, received a fish’s warning before the impending flood. To survive the flood, he was charged with constructing a boat and stocking it with different animals (Abusch and West 330). Nuh, the Noah of the Islamic tradition, is presented in the Holy Qur’an, narrating that Allah sent Nuh (Noah) to warn humanity about the impending flood and to construct an ark to protect his family and animals (Qur’an, Hud 40). A few handfuls in this tale accepted Nuh’s word and were spared from the flood.
Lastly, in the Babylonian epic Gilgamesh, Utnapishtim—a survivor of the legendary flood whom Gilgamesh consults for the key to immortality—is a crucial character. Utnapishtim was the only person to survive because the deity Enlil elevated him and his wife to godhood for saving both human and animal life on the enormous boat he made (Abusch and West 325). These stories convey the same ark of flood but present it in different details and cultural settings.
Comparison of the Flood Myths
The key similarities are the Great Flood’s settings and the chosen characters’ morality. The morality of Noah and his belief in God is highlighted in his narrative, where he was portrayed as a pious and humble man devoted to God (Holy Bible, Genesis 7). Manu and Nuh, like Noah, were seen as virtuous and given the duty of rescuing all life on the planet despite their sins. Utnapishtim, however, was chosen for another reason, even though he appears humble. He was one of the lesser God’s sons, thus being a privileged character in the epic. Even though the key characters’ morality is similarly pious, their origins and reasons for choosing differ.
Although there are obvious parallels between Mesopotamian legends and the Biblical Flood, Biblical history is seen from a distinctive Hebrew viewpoint. The flood’s devastation was caused by arguments amongst the gods in the Babylonian myths, but in Genesis, it was caused by the moral decline of human history. Throughout biblical history, the basic polytheism of the Mesopotamian versions is turned into a proclamation of the omnipotence and goodness of the one true God (Abusch and West 342).
The Qur’anic interpretation and Manu’s narrator describe calamities with natural disasters as the primary reasons for the flood rather than divine wrath. The Hindu scriptures give a thorough account of the flood but do not explain what caused such a severe catastrophe (Abusch and West 335). Although the Qur’an does not go into depth about the causes, the people’s disobedience was a factor in the deluge.
Peculiarities of the Flood Myths
Each narrative reflects the ideals and principles of the religious tradition in which it is recounted and is distinctive to that religion. Even though the narratives share the exact cultural reflection of the prevalence of nature and God in human life, they differ in their perspectives. The culture of Mesopotamia was built on the assumptions of the existence of many gods and quarrels between them that explained many processes, reflecting the rational myth theory. This was well reflected in the narrative of Utnapishtim.
The biblical account of Noah reflects the apocalyptic vision of the moral corruption of humanity, which is a crucial consideration of Christian culture. Islamic Nuh presents the centrality of Allah and its overarching power on humans, especially those who have gone astray, which are central tenets of Islamic culture and Muslim life. Manu’s account reflects the Hindu vision of nature and how the gods can articulate life on the planet since one of the Vishnu avatars was a fish.
Conclusion
The tales of Utnapishtim, Manu, Noah, and Nuh share a lot in common overall, yet they differ in their theological and cultural settings. Yet, they all express the idea that one can be saved only by faith and holiness and that God, or divinity, may bring both disaster and redemption. Their reflection on different cultures indicates how people viewed some aspects of their lives differently and what values were more important.
Works Cited
Abusch, Tzvi, and Emily Blanchard West. “Sowing the Seeds of Uncertainty: The Transmutation of the Mesopotamian Flood Myth in India, Iran, and the Classical World.” Journal of Indo-European studies, vol. 48, no.3, 2020, pp. 325–351. Web.
Holy Bible. American Standard Version, Bible Domain Publishing, 2019.
The Qur’an. Translated by M.A.S. Abdel Haleem, Oxford UP, 2020.