"… If you have not experienced any obstacle in your enterprises, it is
because your heart is pure, that your soul is without stain, and that virtue, probity, and honour will always be dear to you. A man who had the least reproach to make to himself, who had destroyed the good of others, or who had only the intention of so doing, would not be able to participate in our mysteries. In vain would he have in his possession all that you see, our magical language known to him.
The celestial powers—aerial, infernal, terrestrial, and those of the oceans and fire—would rebel against him. All that he wished to undertake would turn to his shame and his confusion, and at each invocation which he might make, the powers that he implored for help and intervention would answer him:
Renounce thy projects. Thou art guilty. Before commanding us, purify thyself, expiate thy faults."
Has anyone ever ascertained with certainty the exact nature of this reproach, and which undertakings are deemed reproachable and unworthy?
Note that the old man in the story allowed him to kidnap a Sultana at the expense of a massacre of servants who were beheaded.
Interesting - last night I had a demonstration of some initiatory rites by the Netjer, as part of this I asked what (if anything) the true “rules” were of this reality.
I was told there’s only one, “More life to all” - modern phrasing, but the concept is clear.
This resonates strongly with that, and other information I’ve received in the past. And it’s not a simplistic call to pacifism, or anything so mundane - it goes a little deeper than that, and sometimes death and killing can serve a purpose.
I can’t lay my hand on the book that has it, but at least one western occult author held that the final question which decided things in an Egyptian paradigm of the afterlife was, “Has at least one human being been glad that you were alive?” or words to that effect.
Saying, simultaneously, that you brought more life (joy, flourishing, etc) to another - and they, a supposedly unbiased innocent, in that they were not on trial - did they have reason to thank you?
Just in everyday life, not when pressed or harrassed, etc…
That doesn’t CHASE the requirements of “be worshipped, bring more life to all, less to none” nor the usual sexual prohibitions of their era (which are mainly about keeping up the birth-rate, something we laugh at to our peril in Europe) nor to property-related stuff - but if you were to make a jigsaw, that piece (Was someone grateful YOU lived?) would fit the space about needing your descendents and others to think of you with affection, maintain your tombs, shrines etc… kind of like “getting voted off the island,” only with real and eternal consequences.
“Bearing witness with love” also ticks most of the boxes of what I understand so far about “observer effect,” and more.