Comparing Gilgamesh And Sartre's Existentialism

Sartre virulently separates his personal flavor of existentialism from any and all things Christian. But it is remarkable how close the Book of Genesis and Existentialism are tied together. The Epic of Gilgamesh may be considered the oldest great work of literature, but is not the first existentialist text. It contains quasi-existentialist themes, but not to an extent that they become compatible with Sartre’s existentialism. In his essay on the Epic, Micah Sadigh argues that the relationships between characters are what make the writing existentialist in nature. But as he presents a convoluted argument buried beneath pages of summary, it is difficult to understand his argument. The Book of Genesis, on the other hand, compatibly covers a broad

But without responsibility, both for ourselves and the rest of society, freedom is meaningless and doesn’t contribute to the existentialist doctrine On freedom Sartre writes, “Man is condemned to be free, and from the moment that he is thrown into this world he is responsible for everything he does” (Sartre 350). This theme is illustrated in the story of Cain and Abel. After Cain’s clear dismay over God’s favorable response towards Abel, God tells him, “Sin is lurking at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it” (Genesis 4:7). Sin is a universal concept and it lurks underneath everyone’s door. In the first part of the passage God indirectly speaks to Cain, generalizing his message. Only in the second part does he directly command Cain, “you must master it”, and therefore emphasizes the individual responsibility of his freedom. Cain is responsible for the way that he acts when sin is “lurking at the door” and his actions then define him and change the course of his life. Cain’s jealousy manifests into rage which results in him killing his brother Abel. He was free to do this, but he had to suffer the consequences which shows he is responsible. Not only does the story focus on the responsibility of individual freedom, but also the responsibility towards fellow humankind. Immediately after God confronts Cain for murdering his brother, Cain asks him “Am I my brother’s keeper?” (Genesis 4:9). The implied

After eating an apple from the tree of knowledge, one would expect Adam and Eve to be instantly bestowed with a moral code sent down from the heavens. This is far from the case. The Ten Commandments, that greatly define Christian morality, don’t show up until the Book of Exodus. In the book of Genesis, we see characters grappling with and developing their own personal moral codes. This is compatible with Sartrean existentialism because he says “moral choice is to be compared to the making of a work of art” (Sartre 361). In no story does God instil a sense of morality in humankind. For instance, in the story of Adam and Eve, after being confronted for eating from the tree of knowledge by God, Eve makes the excuse “The serpent tricked me, and I ate” (Genesis 3:13). Eve unashamedly lies to God and blames the serpent, instead of owning up to the truth. Clearly God did not instill a moral code in her with the consumption of the apple. Thus she is free to craft and develop her own individual moral code, and create her moral work of art. Later in the story of Abraham, we see that he has a much different moral code than that of God. In defense of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, he accuses God, “Far be it from you to so such a thing, to slay he righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous fare as the wicked” (Genesis