THE FORTY TWO PRECEPTS OF MAAT

Many Empires have fallen due to the lack of order as well as balance.  Follow the precepts of MAAT below and have great Empires. Chaos "Utter Confusion" is not the answer!!!!

 (1)  " I have not done iniquity." Variant:  Acting With Falsehood.

(2)  " I have not robbed with violence."

(3)  " I have not done violence ( To anyone or anything)."

     Variant: Rapacious ( Taking by force; Plundering.)

(4)  " I have not committed theft." Variant: Coveted.

(5)  " I have not murdered man or woman."

     Variant:  Or ordered someone else to commit murder.

(6)  " I have not defrauded offerings."

         Variant: or destroyed food supplies or increased or decrease the measures to profit.

(7)  " I have not acted deceitfully. " Variant: with crookedness.

(8)  " I have not robbed things that belong to God.'

(9)  " I have not told no lies."

(10)  " I have not snatched away food."

(11)  " I have not uttered evil words."

      Variant: Or allowed myself to become sullen, to sulk or become depressed.

(12)  " I have not attacked anyone."

(13)  " I have not slaughtered the cattle that are set apart for the Gods."

           Variant: The sacred bull- (Apis)

(14)  " I have not eaten my heart" (overcome with anguish and distraught).

           Variant: Committed perjury.

(15)  " I have not laid waste the ploughed lands."

(16)  " I have not been an eavesdropper or pried into matters to make mischief."

           Variant: Spy

(17)  " I have need spoken against anyone. "

      Variant: babbled gossiped.

(18)  " I have not allowed myself to become angry without cause."

(19)  " I have not committed adultery."

           Variant: and homosexuality.

(20)  " I have not committed any sin against my own purity."

(21)  " I have not violated sacred times and seasons."

(22)  " I have not done that which is abominable."

(23)  " I have not fiery words.  I have not been a man or woman of  anger."

(24)  " I have not stopped my ears against the words of right and wrong (Maat)."

(25)  " I have not stirred up strife (disturbance)."  " I have not caused terror."  I have not

           struck fear into any man or woman."

(26)  " I have not caused any one to weep."

           Variant: hoodwinked.

(27)  " I have not lusted or committed fornication nor have I lain with others of my same sex."

           Variant: or sex with a boy ( or girl).

(28)  " I have not avenged myself." Variant: Resentment.

(29)  " I have not work grief, I have not abused anyone." Variant: Quarrelsome nature.

(30)  " I have not acted insolently or with violence."

(31)  " I have not judged hastily." Variant: or been impatient.

(32)  " I have not transgressed or angered God."

(33)  " I have not multiplied my speech overmuch (talk too much).

(34)  " I have not done harm or evil." Variant: Thought evil.

(35)  " I have not worked treason or curses on the King."

(36)  " I have never befouled the water." Variant: held back the water from flowing in its season.

(37)  " I have not spoken scornfully." Variant: Or yelled unnecessarily or raised my voice.

(38)  " I have not cursed The God."

(39)  " I have not behaved with arrogance." Variant: Boastful.

(40)  " I have not been overwhelmingly proud or sought for distinctions for myself (Selfishness)."

(41)  " I have never magnified my condition beyond what was fitting or increased my wealth,

       except with such things as are (justly) mine own possessions by means of Maat."

      Variant: I have not disputed over possessions except when they concern my own rightful

      possessions. Variant: I have not desired more than what is rightfully mine.

(42)  " I have never thought evil (blasphemed) or slighted The God in my native town.

VEGETARIAN LEVELS

1.Lacto-ovo-vegetarians- Person who do not eat meat products, but consume milk and other dairy products (lacto) and eggs (ovo)

2. Lacto-vegetarians- Person who do not eat meat or eggs, but consume dairy products.

3. Vegans - Persons who do not consume any meat products or animal-by-product (i.e. no honey, no dairy, etc). It can also imply that such person do not wear use items made from or containing animal products as well (i.e. no leather, etc.)

4. Raw/Live Foodists - Person who eat raw, fresh uncooked foods (i.e. vegetables, fruits, nuts and seeds, vegetable and fruit juices.  Foods that are sun cooked (i.e. raw breads) or dehydrated at low temperature (104-106 degrees Fahrenheit) are also permitted, as this technique will not kill the enzymes).

5. Fruitarians – Person who eat only raw/live uncooked fruits.  This group not only includes the fruits we are familiar with, but also some fruits that are erroneously labeled as vegetables (i.e. tomatoes, cucumbers, squash, pumpkin, olives, avocado, etc….anything with a seed inside is con sidered a fruit). Some fruitarians also include raw/live nuts and seeds in their diets.

Note: When references are made to “vegetarian,” the understanding is of someone who does not eat meat of any kind, including poultry and fish/seafood.  Egg whites and honey are permitted on a limited basis in the transition phase, as some processed vegetarian products include these items.  However, one should try to transition as soon as possible to vegan diet, either cooked and or raw, and then from a cooked vegan to a completely raw vegan.

Ethics and the Relationship to Religion

By Sebai Maa

The term Ethics comes from the Greek “rpoc” which means “custom.”  Ethics is considered as a branch of axiology that includes Aesthetics, Ethics, epistemology, Logic and Metaphysics.  The term “Axiology,” comes from the Greek axia, acia, meaning value or worth.  This is a study of value, what is of value or worth while or quality.  Ethics tries to understand what constitutes morality; that is, defining what is right from what is wrong.  It is usually thought that the ethics are based on what is valued, so the concepts of value theory and meta-ethics have been associated with ethics.  In Western traditions ethics is at times referred to as moral philosophy since so much of western ethical reflections have been influenced by religious thought, dealing with right and wrong in human behavior.  Since all religion have been to contain a moral element, and since the western religious approaches to ethics dominated the researches into ethics historically instead of secular methods, a moralistic approach was taken for the study of ethics.  Therefore, a theistic religion, which promotes the idea that ethics arise from revealed truths that are given by divine sources will lead to the study of ethics from the standpoint of theology.  Works on Ethics in Western philosophical treatises were developed within the literary culture of religious ideas based on the Old testament of the Hebrew Bible had a great influence on the western ethical philosophers either directly or indirectly.  However, since there were import differences of opinion as to what the ethical teaching of the bible was different understandings related to ethics arose.  Some philosophers have indeed suggested that either modern comprehensions of the bible are wrong in itself.  Consequently, Jewish thought has struggled with understanding the interaction between morality and the law. 

The golden rule and the Ten Commandments have had a strong influence on western ethical and moral thought.  The teaching from Judaism often referred to as “the Golden Rule” Which originates in the 18^th verse of Leviticus 19, in the Old Testament has had a profound impact on western ethical philosophical thought.  “Thou shalt not avenge, not bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself: I am the LORD.”  This is one of the most famous and oft-quoted principles from the bible.  Thought the golden rule has not been applied in many human interactions and acting in contradiction with it has led to national and international conflict, it is an altruistic ideal that fascinates many people due to its intrinsic truthful nature.  So the inability of culture to rise to the ethical ideal does not diminish the recognition of it but neither does that recognition promote cultural altruism either.  This is one of the perplexing aspects of human culture which has occupied the minds of many ethical and moral philosophers throughout history.  The Ten Commandments are prominently features of Judaism and Christianity. 

Many believe that the Golden Rule, which teaches people to “treat others as you want to be treated”, is the common denominator of all moral codes and religions.   The ethic of reciprocity (or “The Golden Rule”) is a general moral principle found in virtually all religions and culture, often as fundamental rule, a fact which suggests that it may be related to innate aspects of human nature.  Altruism takes the theory of a golden rule to a higher standard in that a person should place others, needs, well being and happiness, before oneself.  As far as the subject of ethics in religion goes; it has been explored by the religions in one of two approaches. 

The first approach is by religious agency and demand the deity of a religion provides the ethical framework or regulation and demands their use by the religion’s adherents; this may be thought of as a categorical imperative.  Another approach is by exploring ethics as a separate entity from religion which religions is used to promote virtue in their adherents for their betterment and the betterment of and harmony in society; this may be thought of as an altruistic imperative.  It might be well justified to that all human cultures, at some point in their history, have established what they believe to be a moral (ethical) and principled standard for establishing and maintaining order in a society even if they apply it to their own society and selectively to others.  The primary standard may be regarded as the injunction against harming others and the highest expression of that moral sanction is to refrain from killing.  Therefore, from that highest of the humanitarian ethics we may accept the concept of non-killing as a universal canon or dictum that leads or least should lead to peace and harmony in society.  Therefore, we can say that policies and concepts that promote conflicts that directly or indirectly lead to social strife and killing are anti-humanitarian ethics or ethics of a purpose other humanitarian conceptions, purposes or goals.  In the study of religion it is important to distinguish between morality and ethics for the purpose of understanding the distinctions as applied in scholarly studies.  Ethics may be defined as: A set of principles of right conduct; theory or a system of moral values; “An ethics of service is at war with a craving for gain” (Gregg Easterbrook): ethics (used with a sing. Or pl. verb): The rules or standards governing the conduct of a person or the members of a profession: medical ethics. 

Ethics here is to be thought of as a system or way of thought arrived at through the reasoning faculty of the mind.  It is a theory developed through logical and rational and perhaps scientific reflections based on experiences gained from the world.  When thought of as a discipline separate from religion, ethic has been associated with reason, science, humanism or secular humanism.

In religion ethics are arrived at through divine agency or enlightened leadership but is does not prelude a philosophical or phenomenological reflective process.  In religion, ethics are also referred to as morals or a system of morality that is rejoined to promote virtue.  Virtue is promoted so as to purify the personality and cause it to become a proper vessel for higher spiritual experiences.  So in religion, rules or regulations for proper conduct may be given to religious aspirants by a god or goddess or by a personality that has had communion with god or goddess.  In Christianity Moses received the Ten Commandments from God; in Ancient Egyptian religion the Laws of Maat were given to the priests and priestesses by the God Djehuti.  So when thought of as a discipline within or arising from religious experience, ethics has been associated by theologians with morality.  In this context morality may be defined as “a concern with the distinction between good and evil or right and wrong; right or good conduct 2: motivation based on ideas of right and wrong.