Salvete mi amici et amicae
This is a recycled post from June 2002 where I responded to certain questions by our conditor Florus
I have referred to higher deities as Involuti, distinct from the gods of myth with which we are most familiar, and have also at times, in different places distinguished lesser forms of divinities. The distinction is helpful when discussing some of the things that have come up in this string.
MAF: Well, some of them might be personifications of natural forces, but
the natural forces are divine to start with and thus share is what I
might call "Superpersonality",
Respondo
There are certain forces of nature, and other forces, activities, and things, which would be regarded as indigimenta of the gods and goddeses. Sometimes these may be mistaken as numina as they are so narrowly identified with specific forces or activities. Such is the case of the indigimenta of Ceres, each governing a particular activity related to agriculture. These would be Reparator, Imporcitor, Obarator, Occator, Sarritor, Subruncinator, Messor, Convector, Conditor, and Promitor. I regard these to be only differing aspects of Ceres, and personifications of the activities they govern only so far as they represent Ceres Herself conducting these activities. In this particular case we have a source (Fabius Pictor quoted by Varro) linking the indigimenta directly with Ceres. The numina would be the different powers wielded by Ceres as she performs each of these activities. Numina are not gods, or aspects of gods, or personified forces of nature, or divinities in any sense. Numina are only powers employed by divinities, and may resonate in places or things after a deity has used the power in that place or thing. Some other lesser deities might better be regarded as indigimenta, but we do not necessarily know with which deity they had been identified. Sometimes these are presented as divinities in their own right, mythologically as the offspring of other deities. Such may be the case with Proserpina (seed), Seia (sown seed), Nodutus (joints and knots on grain plants), Voltutina (corn husks folded over ears), Patelana (the husks of corn when they open to allow the ears to emerge), Flora (the flowers of grain), Pomona (the fruit of the grain), Segetia (green grain ripening in above ground ovens), and Tutilina (harvested and ripened grain stored below ground in a mundus), which are all aspects of Ceres as the goddess of grain. Flora and Pomona were also goddesses in their own right in other Italic communities, adopted into Roman myth and practice both as goddesses and as indigimenta. The term Ceres is more a title than the name of a goddess, and thus Roman Ceres can be identified with different goddesses from other comunities. We have to understand that as Rome grew and absorbed other communities, the local forms of gods and goddesses were integrated into Roman myth, and also that the people of those communities were brought to Rome, retaining their own gods and goddesses. So today we find a very complex situation with the same name of a god or goddess being understood by different elements of Rome society, at different times, to represent very different aspects of divinity.
MAF: Pisc, "Iuppiter" may refer to divinity itself generically, and the
Divine Fire/Logos. Of course you are correct that there are higher
forces relative to the more mythologised version of Him, but I believe
those to add up in the end to the same as the demythologised Iuppiter
mentioned first. But even the mythologised deities battle against forces
of disorder and darkness. (In Taoism the Tao is the ultimate "divinity"
(a metaphysicalised Mother goddess), and the deities and other spiritual
beings function within the universe as in the Religio Graecoromana. In
Hinduism the deities are more involved in creating the world as well as
upholding and defending it.)
Respondeo:
There is an evolution in the conception of Juppiter, especially in the imperial period. From the Chaldean Oracles, Proclus quoting in his commentary on the Parmenides, "They are intellectual conceptions from the Paternal Fountain partaking abundantly of the brillance of Fire in the culmination of unresting Time. But the primary self-perfecting Fountain of the Father poured forth these primogenial Ideas." The Paternal Fountain, the Fountain of the Father, is at times identified with Jupiter in the Chaldean Orcales, as where Synes quotes from that work, saying, "of all Souls, those certainly are superlatively blessed, which are poured forth from Heaven to Earth; and they are happy, and have ineffable stamina, as many as proceed from Thy Splendid Self, O King, or from Jove Himself, under the strong necessity of Mithus." In commenting on Euclid's Elements Proclus mentions that Philolaus reflects that the right angle of a square equates to Rhea, Hestia, and Demeter, as the "effluences and generative powers...these life-giving divine forces' received by the earth, and that the angle of the equilateral triangle is assigned by Philolaus to "Kronos, Hades, Ares, and Dionysus, since he includes within their province the entire fourfold ordering of the cosmic elements derived from the heavens or from the four segments of the zodiacal circle." Then he continues, "Hence a tetradic triad and a triadic tetrad that partake of the generative and creative goods maintain the whole order of generated things. The number twelve, which is their product, ascends towards a single monad, the sovereignty of Zeus. Philolaus says that the angle of the dodecagon is the angle of Zeus, because Zeus holds together in a single unity the whole duodecimal number. In Plato likewise Zeus leads 'the twelve' and has absolute dominion over all things." There is in Proclus' thought a hierarchy of divinity. We could say that there is the material figure of the apparent course of the planet Jupiter, above which is the celestial figure of Jupiter that itself resides in the soul figure of Jupiter. The souls of the Psychic Realm are governed by the Intelligibles of the Noetic Realm, and the intelligible Jupiter would thus rule over the soul figure of Jupiter. And the Intelligible Jupiter would himself be an extension of the Intellectual or Ineffable Jupiter, one of the theoi of the Henadic Realm. In the Elements of Theology Proclus mentions that there are only a limited number of these Henadic gods, such as gods of purifying, propitiating, perfecting, and generating, Jupiter perhaps identified with the last. I do not think however that Proclus would carry Jupiter further above the Henadic Realm so as to say that He *is* the Monad, nor would He be the Creative Fire of the Chaldean Oracles. In some of the mystery cults, prior to Proclus of course, Jupiter was raised to an exceedingly high status, maybe even as a generic term for divinity as you say, but I do not recall Him be regarded as the Highest God in any of them. Jupiter is regarded as commanding the Universe as He became identified with the Axis Mundi. But in that, as in the Mithraic cult, there was then identified an even higher deity than Jupiter, as it was understood that the position of the Axis Mundi could be altered, and that thus the Lord of Destiny had power even over Jupiter.
This idea that you and Draco have mentioned, of gods of order and disorder, may be latent in some of the early myths. It too became more prevalent in later philosophical speculations. Perhaps under the influence of Zoroastrianism as some scholars would have it, particularly where it became so well defined as a dualism, although there were earlier threads in Greek philosophy that may also have given rise to it. This idea imo leads to a dualistic system that I find alien to my philosophical precepts. While I recognize a dichotomy, mythologically associated with male and female forces, generating and regenerating the universe through a diastolic-systolic process, there still remains a underlying principle of unity which cannot be reconciled with your chaos/order dualism.
For the rest of the list members, this is what I was referring to when I spoke of philosophical speculation about the higher gods. Mythic Jupiter may be a persona of some higher deity, but we can never have any real knowledge of the higher gods.
MAF: I would look forward to more information and musings upon the "Involuti"
( called that why?).
Respondeo:
We may have to put off some musings on the Involuti for other posts, but I will offer a short reply here to begin that. Involuto in Italian means intricate and involved. It can mean convoluted, and in a sense, the active forces that are hidden behind an intricate veil of appearance. Thus the Involuti may be identified as the Shrouded Gods, as were called the Etruscan Aiseras. On the level that we may become aware of the Involuti, Their effect is the intricate web of a multitude of disconnected events, cosmic and mundane, all coming together to produce a single synchronetic moment. They are then identified as Providence effecting Destiny. But They are more than that, together forming what could be described as the Matrix in the womb of Plato's World Soul. All potentialities extend from the Paternal Source and must pass through the Womb where they are given form and proportioned into manifestation. By that potentialities not only receive form, but time and place, and their destinies in the manifested world are meted out by the Involuti. The universe is viewed as a living being, composed of a physical body that we recognize in the physical universe, endowed with an animating soul to give it life, and governed with mind, with the Involuti acting as the channels through which flow the three principles of creation (generating, effecting, and perfecting), binding all parts together and imbuing each part with life, intelligence, and being. By analogy then, the Involuti act in the living universe as the mass of blood vessels, nerves, and the channels through which flow the life force that the Chinese call chi. This perception of the Involuti as a rete is always maintained; They are never perceived individually, but always acting in concert as the mesh that binds all things together.
Di consentes vos semper ament.
Pagan Theology
Moderator: Aldus Marius
4 posts • Page 1 of 1
by Horatius Piscinus on Mon Nov 10, 2003 12:33 pm
Salvete mi amici et amicae
This too is a recycled post from June 2002 (or was it 2001), addressed to SVR's first rector of the Collegium Religionis, I think before I joined SVR. Anyway it offers some of my ideas and is related to developing a Pagan theology.
Recently I was approached by young Atticus/Flaccus to answer some questions regarding the religio. He has in mind writing a fictional symposium where various characters, Fortunatus and myself among them, would express different views. Here are my answers, rather lengthy I am afraid, but they continue in the area of my previous posts to this list.
* * *
Salve Attice
Praenotiones:
1) Id omnes, quo aliquid intellegitur vel intellegi potest, ens habent. Quinam ens est? Notio entis stricte definiri non potest. Ens est id, quod exsistit vel saltem exsistere potest, vel, ens est aliquid ad exsistendum ordinatum, maxime indeterminatum, simplicissimum, in quo omnia conveniunt. Quaelibet res aut est, aut non est. Ens est id, quod non est nihilum. Nihilum absolutum vel merum nihilum est absentia totius entis.
2) Creatio enim est productio totius substantiae ex nihilo. Sed, <<ex nihilo nihil fit>>: est axioma ab omnibus indubitanter acceptum et evidenti experientia universali firmatum. Ergo creatio est impossibilis.
3) Omnia, quae revera exsistunt et quae possunt exsistere, in suo esse determinata sunt modis specialibus essendi, quibus allia ab aliis distinguuntur. Sic omnes intersunt ens infinite perfectum et ens in suo esse limitatum, uter ab fonte entis bis extendent. Epicurus noster Lucretius inquit: "Nihil igitur mors est, quoniam natura animi habetur mortalis."
My current intent is a dialogue about the nature of the gods mainly:
(1)who are they? and (2) what are they?
All things that exist or may possibly exist have being. In so far as all things are produced from some other thing, they have limited being. But in so far as all things are extensions of the source of all being, participating in that source, all things possess an infinitely perfect being. Similarly, as all things have some intelligible form, whether as an object or as an energy or as an entity that is spiritual, all things partake in intelligence. As Cicero says, our minds have been plucked from the divine mind, and by extension all creatures, animal and plant, have a degree of intelligence which must come from the same source. And in as much as humans, animals, and plants are alive, are animate, they all possess a degree of soulfulness that is derived from the Soul. Inanimate things likewise have being, have intelligible forms and are contained within the World Soul, thus, although to a lesser degree, they too posses the attributes of being, mind and life. All living things implicitly have mind, and all things having intelligence implicitly have being. The single source of these attributes we say is divine, and as all things participate in the source from which they are produced, therefore all things are possessed by a degree of divinity. As Ovid says, "Est deus in nobis." And as Pliny states, after the Stoics, "The World and this expanse...are properly held to be a deity, everlasting, boundless, an entity without a beginning and one that will never end. (N. H. 1.1)" In that we should not confuse the World to which Pliny refers as the one held in common expression.
The attributes of Being, Life, and Intelligence are measured only in potency, as Proclus has stated in The Elements of Theology. They are qualities that extend from divine sources, and as such (Prop. 116) "Every god is above Being, above Life, and above Intelligence." Also as Proclus states (Prop. 123) "All that is divine is itself ineffable and unknowable by any secondary being because of its supra-existential unity, but it may be apprehended and known from the existents which participates in it: wherefor only the First Principle is completely unknowable, as being unparticipated." Of these gods Proclus states that (Prop. 120) "Every god embraces in his substance the function of exercising providence towards the universe; and the primary providence resides in the gods." The Shrouded Gods, ineffable and unknowable, exercising providence upon the universe, are the Aiseras, whom I refer to as the Involuti, and of which I wrote to you before. We cannot know Them or anything about Them, but we may apprehend Them and know of Them from the existents which participates in Them. Stoicus noster inquit: Recede in te ipsum. Looking within ourselves, finding what is divine, we can apprehend that there is a source of divinity. More about the Involuti may be made known and apprehended by contemplating upon the gods to whom you refer, those that we hear of in the ancient myths.
(Prop. 132) "All orders of gods are bound together by mean terms." The gods of myth, the Di consentes et Di inferni, and also the lesser gods, being more divine than ourselves, but less than the Involuti, are intermediate. They are everlasting in that they are universal, the universe existing in all time, yet they are not eternal as the universe is not eternal, and only the Involuti, transcending the universe and thus time itself, can thus be said to be eternal. The gods of myth proceed from the Involuti, thus they can be said to have been born from one another as in the genealogy of Hyginus, or it may be generally expressed as with Ovid in the Metamorphoses that prior to the formation of the universe "No God, no Titan shone from sea or sky." Of the various orders of gods, of which the gods of myth may be said to personify, Proclus offers that there are Generating (152), Perfecting (153), Protecting (154) Life-Giving (155), Purifying (156), Demiurgic (157) and Elevating (158). Among the Involuti, each would possess all principles, powers, and attributes, and would also in each contain all orders of the gods. Among the Di consentes who are personifications of the Involuti in the Universe, these orders of lesser gods would be within each as well. Thus Minerva can be said to be a goddess of purification when She heals or assists us in discerning, She can be demiurgic in assisting us in various crafts, or elevating in guiding us to higher levels of realization, yet only in Her indigimata would She be more specifically of one order than another.
Such gods of myth, in answer then to your questions of who and what they may be, proceeding from the Involuti, are expressions of the Involuti, being distinct personae by which the Involuti exercise providence in the Universe. In similar fashion, the lesser gods proceeding from the gods, are the means by which providence is exercised in all things, all activities, and all principles that together form the Universe. Likewise, that divine part within ourselves exercises providence upon us.
(3)where are they?
(Prop. 144) The procession of all things existent and all cosmic orders of existents extend as far as do the orders of gods.
(Prop. 139) The sequence of principles which participate the divine henads extends from Being to the bodily nature, since Being is the first (Prop 138)and body, inasmuch as we speak of heavenly or divine bodies, the last participant.
(Prop. 142) The gods are present alike to all things; not all things, however, are present alike to the gods, but each order has a share in their presence proportioned to its station and capacity, some things receiving them as unities and others as manifolds, some perpetually and others for a time, some incorporeally and others through body.
The universe which we perceive, whether directly through our senses or assisted by scientific instruments, is contained within a multidimensional universe. Time and space compose only four dimensions, where our scientists presently discuss ten dimensions; the implication being that our phenomenal universe is contained within and effected upon by other universes of greater dimensions. Similarly our philosophers speak of four planes of existence, each proceeding from and contained within one another. Theon of Smyrna spoke of "the entire world (as) a sphere and the earth, which is itself a spheroid, is placed in the middle. That the earth is the center of the universe and that it is but a point in relationship to the size of the universe: this is what must be established before anything else.(Mathematics III.1)" We may take this to mean in the physical sense that the earth is our center within the relative universe, and that it is our relative center within the World. The World here is not only the planet we call earth but contains the other astronomical bodies immediately effecting upon it, as Theon understood, and also the other dimensions coordinate with our earth and effecting upon it. The Universe, distinct from physical universe of our senses, or of the more broadly understood multidimensional universe, contains all the universes, in all the planes of existence, and is itself contained with an all embracing divine Soul. The Involuti transcend the Universe, yet are Themselves held within the same divine Soul, and proceed in all things alike.
The gods who proceed from the Involuti are a part of and within the Universe. Their presence is everywhere, and yet nowhere in our sense of perception. The old philosophical question of how many angels may dance on the head of a pin is plainly understood, in that incorporeal spiritual beings do not have bodies which are limited to the same dimensional restrictions of physical objects, there can be, therefore, an infinite number at any one point, yet are not anywhere as we would normally understand. As I have explained elsewhere, the gods employ powers which we call numina, and by using these powers may instill a numen within an object or a place that they act upon. And as an aspect of a god, wielding a power over a specific activity, may be regarded as their indigimentus, then we may say that the god is present in any particular activity. But the god Himself cannot be understood in a normal sense to be located within any object, place, or activity. We invoke the gods to enter our groves, our temples, or certain objects such as statues, only in a certain sense of increasing the degree of potency of divinity contained within such things. Likewise we may ourselves be infused with a greater degree of divinity than is normally our capacity to hold, thus being inspired by a god or goddess. Or we may invoke a god to assist us in any particular activity, benevolently effecting upon our efforts in a way that we may say that they are present. Livy offers this advice, "Omnia prospera eveniunt sequentibus deos, adversa spernentibus. (5.51.5)" By inviting the presence of the gods to assist us, working in harmony with the divine, we place ourselves within the presence of the gods, more than that they arrive at any particular location, as they are already everywhere. And we must understand the same in Ovid, "Innocue vivite numen ad est," for the gods and their numina are everywhere at all times and it is only by opening ourselves to their presence that we may apprehend them.
(4) are offerings a thanksgiving to the gods or is it about do ut des ?
To answer your specific question, an offering of thanksgiving is the same, as it is implied that thanks is being giving in fulfillment of a do ut des vow previously given.
Previously I sent:
There is definitely a contractual element in the rituals of the religio romana. The Romans did not command the gods, as in the magical formulae of the Greco-Egyptians. And they never expected petitional prayers in themselves to be favorably answered. Do ut des is a contract. The Romans made sacrifices for six different reasons. 1) To honor the gods and to commemorate certain events such as the dedication of a temple, certainly. 2) To propitiate the gods when some disaster occurred or other event whereby the gods demanded a sacrifice. 3) Similarly, if divination, dreams or visions revealed a requirement that a sacrifice be made. By far though 4) most sacrifices made by individuals were performed in thanks, after a contract was met by the gods. The evidence we have are the several altars erected ex voto. A vow was made that an altar or temple or renovation would be undertaken IF the god first did as was requested. The Romans did a lot of building. Many contracts were fulfilled. Sometimes, 5) in expectation that their prayers would be answered they would erect altars. Most often these last type of sacrifices were dedicated pro salute in hopes of being healed.
In addition I mentioned a sixth type of sacrificial offering being made, "The ones not to honor, or to thank the gods, not part of any contract, but made in conjunction with purification rites." This type of sacrifice is like a propitiation sacrifice (2) in that one assumes they have already been made unclean in some manner and need to cleanse himself in atonement, and at the same time this is like the thanksgiving sacrifices in that there is an implied do ut des relationship whereby the god is asked to make the purification.
(5) is ritual useful for one who does not believe the gods can be influenced by them ?
Ritual is for the benefit of the performer and cannot be said to effect a deity. Deities cannot be compelled to act through the performance of any ritual, as some so mistakenly assume. There are two very different forms of ritual, or magic as we may say. The incantori attempt to use a false form of magic, trying to compel the gods with words of power and obscure symbols, because they do not know or understand the gods. Others petition the gods by mouthing meaningless words without sincerity or knowledge, using only form without substance. Such forms of ritual are useless and may only be said to influence the gods in that it angers them by its impertinence.
The other form of ritual that is found in the religio romana works in harmony with the Universe. Ritual is a doorway, done properly, which places the practitioner into a harmonious relationship with the Universe and with the gods, thus opening them to the gods. The purpose of ritual is to bring one across the threshold of their everyday consciousness of reality into the alternate reality where they may become aware of the presence of the gods. Ritual is a tool, a means of effecting a change in the perceptions of the practitioner, and as such it is useful to employ. Another aspect of properly conducted ritual is that it is beneficial in preparing one for what is met on the other side. Once one enters the other realms there is no surety in what may be encountered, and just as you would dress properly for the weather, or don armour when entering into battle, ritual provides a means of protective method of entering the mystical. One does not engage in a full ritual without proper preparation, purification, and proper precaution being taken first. Most importantly perhaps is that ritual involving harmonizing oneself to the Universe effects upon their very being, so that one continues this harmonious relationship afterwards and walks in the ways of the gods. For all those reasons ritual is not only useful but essential in the practise of the religio romana.
The manner of your questions are philosophical in nature, and can thus only be answered from a philosophical perspective. But true understanding is not made through intellectual exercise alone. Study, for all of its importance, is only one activity that may bring one into a comprehension of divinity, when coupled with other pursuits. I would place more emphasis on the practice of the religio and the mystical elements of its ritual to harmonize one's nature to that of the Universe, thus gaining an awareness of the gods. Videre est credere, experientia docet. But study of the ancient philosophies, and practice of the ancient rites will not alone bring about an encounter with the gods. There is also an ethical aspect of the religio, living in the ways of the gods, which for me is the most important. Plotinus, in the second tractate of the first Ennead, states, "The solution is in understanding the virtues and what each has to give; thus the man will learn to work with this or that as every several need demands; and as he reaches loftier principles and other standards these in turn will define his conduct; ...he will live, nolonger, the human life of the good man...but leaving this beneath him, will take up instead another life, that of the Gods." The three divine principles of Being, Intelligence and Life, expressed in ourselves as body, mind and soul, must each be worked with progressively. While younger we may place more emphasis on the physical body to maintain a healthy vehicle for mind and soul in this life, later it becomes more important to strengthen the pneumatic body that will be the vehicle to carry one back to their origin. Likewise with the mind and soul, at different stages of life what is required in preparing for the next stage of existence shall alter. As those parts of mind, body, and soul that are of limited being will eventually expire, the other parts that participate in the infinite shall be carried aloft to encounter the divine, the results of which will depend upon one's preparation in this life. That does not mean that I subscribe to the notion that one is to be judged before the gods, meted out reward or punishment, but relates to a different perspective of the Universe and one's role in the divine design of it. One may say then that proper study, proper ritual and proper conduct all contribute to attaining a knowledge of one's relationship to the Universe, and piety is the proper exercise of each in proportion.
* * *
Di vos semper bene ament
This too is a recycled post from June 2002 (or was it 2001), addressed to SVR's first rector of the Collegium Religionis, I think before I joined SVR. Anyway it offers some of my ideas and is related to developing a Pagan theology.
Recently I was approached by young Atticus/Flaccus to answer some questions regarding the religio. He has in mind writing a fictional symposium where various characters, Fortunatus and myself among them, would express different views. Here are my answers, rather lengthy I am afraid, but they continue in the area of my previous posts to this list.
* * *
Salve Attice
Praenotiones:
1) Id omnes, quo aliquid intellegitur vel intellegi potest, ens habent. Quinam ens est? Notio entis stricte definiri non potest. Ens est id, quod exsistit vel saltem exsistere potest, vel, ens est aliquid ad exsistendum ordinatum, maxime indeterminatum, simplicissimum, in quo omnia conveniunt. Quaelibet res aut est, aut non est. Ens est id, quod non est nihilum. Nihilum absolutum vel merum nihilum est absentia totius entis.
2) Creatio enim est productio totius substantiae ex nihilo. Sed, <<ex nihilo nihil fit>>: est axioma ab omnibus indubitanter acceptum et evidenti experientia universali firmatum. Ergo creatio est impossibilis.
3) Omnia, quae revera exsistunt et quae possunt exsistere, in suo esse determinata sunt modis specialibus essendi, quibus allia ab aliis distinguuntur. Sic omnes intersunt ens infinite perfectum et ens in suo esse limitatum, uter ab fonte entis bis extendent. Epicurus noster Lucretius inquit: "Nihil igitur mors est, quoniam natura animi habetur mortalis."
My current intent is a dialogue about the nature of the gods mainly:
(1)who are they? and (2) what are they?
All things that exist or may possibly exist have being. In so far as all things are produced from some other thing, they have limited being. But in so far as all things are extensions of the source of all being, participating in that source, all things possess an infinitely perfect being. Similarly, as all things have some intelligible form, whether as an object or as an energy or as an entity that is spiritual, all things partake in intelligence. As Cicero says, our minds have been plucked from the divine mind, and by extension all creatures, animal and plant, have a degree of intelligence which must come from the same source. And in as much as humans, animals, and plants are alive, are animate, they all possess a degree of soulfulness that is derived from the Soul. Inanimate things likewise have being, have intelligible forms and are contained within the World Soul, thus, although to a lesser degree, they too posses the attributes of being, mind and life. All living things implicitly have mind, and all things having intelligence implicitly have being. The single source of these attributes we say is divine, and as all things participate in the source from which they are produced, therefore all things are possessed by a degree of divinity. As Ovid says, "Est deus in nobis." And as Pliny states, after the Stoics, "The World and this expanse...are properly held to be a deity, everlasting, boundless, an entity without a beginning and one that will never end. (N. H. 1.1)" In that we should not confuse the World to which Pliny refers as the one held in common expression.
The attributes of Being, Life, and Intelligence are measured only in potency, as Proclus has stated in The Elements of Theology. They are qualities that extend from divine sources, and as such (Prop. 116) "Every god is above Being, above Life, and above Intelligence." Also as Proclus states (Prop. 123) "All that is divine is itself ineffable and unknowable by any secondary being because of its supra-existential unity, but it may be apprehended and known from the existents which participates in it: wherefor only the First Principle is completely unknowable, as being unparticipated." Of these gods Proclus states that (Prop. 120) "Every god embraces in his substance the function of exercising providence towards the universe; and the primary providence resides in the gods." The Shrouded Gods, ineffable and unknowable, exercising providence upon the universe, are the Aiseras, whom I refer to as the Involuti, and of which I wrote to you before. We cannot know Them or anything about Them, but we may apprehend Them and know of Them from the existents which participates in Them. Stoicus noster inquit: Recede in te ipsum. Looking within ourselves, finding what is divine, we can apprehend that there is a source of divinity. More about the Involuti may be made known and apprehended by contemplating upon the gods to whom you refer, those that we hear of in the ancient myths.
(Prop. 132) "All orders of gods are bound together by mean terms." The gods of myth, the Di consentes et Di inferni, and also the lesser gods, being more divine than ourselves, but less than the Involuti, are intermediate. They are everlasting in that they are universal, the universe existing in all time, yet they are not eternal as the universe is not eternal, and only the Involuti, transcending the universe and thus time itself, can thus be said to be eternal. The gods of myth proceed from the Involuti, thus they can be said to have been born from one another as in the genealogy of Hyginus, or it may be generally expressed as with Ovid in the Metamorphoses that prior to the formation of the universe "No God, no Titan shone from sea or sky." Of the various orders of gods, of which the gods of myth may be said to personify, Proclus offers that there are Generating (152), Perfecting (153), Protecting (154) Life-Giving (155), Purifying (156), Demiurgic (157) and Elevating (158). Among the Involuti, each would possess all principles, powers, and attributes, and would also in each contain all orders of the gods. Among the Di consentes who are personifications of the Involuti in the Universe, these orders of lesser gods would be within each as well. Thus Minerva can be said to be a goddess of purification when She heals or assists us in discerning, She can be demiurgic in assisting us in various crafts, or elevating in guiding us to higher levels of realization, yet only in Her indigimata would She be more specifically of one order than another.
Such gods of myth, in answer then to your questions of who and what they may be, proceeding from the Involuti, are expressions of the Involuti, being distinct personae by which the Involuti exercise providence in the Universe. In similar fashion, the lesser gods proceeding from the gods, are the means by which providence is exercised in all things, all activities, and all principles that together form the Universe. Likewise, that divine part within ourselves exercises providence upon us.
(3)where are they?
(Prop. 144) The procession of all things existent and all cosmic orders of existents extend as far as do the orders of gods.
(Prop. 139) The sequence of principles which participate the divine henads extends from Being to the bodily nature, since Being is the first (Prop 138)and body, inasmuch as we speak of heavenly or divine bodies, the last participant.
(Prop. 142) The gods are present alike to all things; not all things, however, are present alike to the gods, but each order has a share in their presence proportioned to its station and capacity, some things receiving them as unities and others as manifolds, some perpetually and others for a time, some incorporeally and others through body.
The universe which we perceive, whether directly through our senses or assisted by scientific instruments, is contained within a multidimensional universe. Time and space compose only four dimensions, where our scientists presently discuss ten dimensions; the implication being that our phenomenal universe is contained within and effected upon by other universes of greater dimensions. Similarly our philosophers speak of four planes of existence, each proceeding from and contained within one another. Theon of Smyrna spoke of "the entire world (as) a sphere and the earth, which is itself a spheroid, is placed in the middle. That the earth is the center of the universe and that it is but a point in relationship to the size of the universe: this is what must be established before anything else.(Mathematics III.1)" We may take this to mean in the physical sense that the earth is our center within the relative universe, and that it is our relative center within the World. The World here is not only the planet we call earth but contains the other astronomical bodies immediately effecting upon it, as Theon understood, and also the other dimensions coordinate with our earth and effecting upon it. The Universe, distinct from physical universe of our senses, or of the more broadly understood multidimensional universe, contains all the universes, in all the planes of existence, and is itself contained with an all embracing divine Soul. The Involuti transcend the Universe, yet are Themselves held within the same divine Soul, and proceed in all things alike.
The gods who proceed from the Involuti are a part of and within the Universe. Their presence is everywhere, and yet nowhere in our sense of perception. The old philosophical question of how many angels may dance on the head of a pin is plainly understood, in that incorporeal spiritual beings do not have bodies which are limited to the same dimensional restrictions of physical objects, there can be, therefore, an infinite number at any one point, yet are not anywhere as we would normally understand. As I have explained elsewhere, the gods employ powers which we call numina, and by using these powers may instill a numen within an object or a place that they act upon. And as an aspect of a god, wielding a power over a specific activity, may be regarded as their indigimentus, then we may say that the god is present in any particular activity. But the god Himself cannot be understood in a normal sense to be located within any object, place, or activity. We invoke the gods to enter our groves, our temples, or certain objects such as statues, only in a certain sense of increasing the degree of potency of divinity contained within such things. Likewise we may ourselves be infused with a greater degree of divinity than is normally our capacity to hold, thus being inspired by a god or goddess. Or we may invoke a god to assist us in any particular activity, benevolently effecting upon our efforts in a way that we may say that they are present. Livy offers this advice, "Omnia prospera eveniunt sequentibus deos, adversa spernentibus. (5.51.5)" By inviting the presence of the gods to assist us, working in harmony with the divine, we place ourselves within the presence of the gods, more than that they arrive at any particular location, as they are already everywhere. And we must understand the same in Ovid, "Innocue vivite numen ad est," for the gods and their numina are everywhere at all times and it is only by opening ourselves to their presence that we may apprehend them.
(4) are offerings a thanksgiving to the gods or is it about do ut des ?
To answer your specific question, an offering of thanksgiving is the same, as it is implied that thanks is being giving in fulfillment of a do ut des vow previously given.
Previously I sent:
There is definitely a contractual element in the rituals of the religio romana. The Romans did not command the gods, as in the magical formulae of the Greco-Egyptians. And they never expected petitional prayers in themselves to be favorably answered. Do ut des is a contract. The Romans made sacrifices for six different reasons. 1) To honor the gods and to commemorate certain events such as the dedication of a temple, certainly. 2) To propitiate the gods when some disaster occurred or other event whereby the gods demanded a sacrifice. 3) Similarly, if divination, dreams or visions revealed a requirement that a sacrifice be made. By far though 4) most sacrifices made by individuals were performed in thanks, after a contract was met by the gods. The evidence we have are the several altars erected ex voto. A vow was made that an altar or temple or renovation would be undertaken IF the god first did as was requested. The Romans did a lot of building. Many contracts were fulfilled. Sometimes, 5) in expectation that their prayers would be answered they would erect altars. Most often these last type of sacrifices were dedicated pro salute in hopes of being healed.
In addition I mentioned a sixth type of sacrificial offering being made, "The ones not to honor, or to thank the gods, not part of any contract, but made in conjunction with purification rites." This type of sacrifice is like a propitiation sacrifice (2) in that one assumes they have already been made unclean in some manner and need to cleanse himself in atonement, and at the same time this is like the thanksgiving sacrifices in that there is an implied do ut des relationship whereby the god is asked to make the purification.
(5) is ritual useful for one who does not believe the gods can be influenced by them ?
Ritual is for the benefit of the performer and cannot be said to effect a deity. Deities cannot be compelled to act through the performance of any ritual, as some so mistakenly assume. There are two very different forms of ritual, or magic as we may say. The incantori attempt to use a false form of magic, trying to compel the gods with words of power and obscure symbols, because they do not know or understand the gods. Others petition the gods by mouthing meaningless words without sincerity or knowledge, using only form without substance. Such forms of ritual are useless and may only be said to influence the gods in that it angers them by its impertinence.
The other form of ritual that is found in the religio romana works in harmony with the Universe. Ritual is a doorway, done properly, which places the practitioner into a harmonious relationship with the Universe and with the gods, thus opening them to the gods. The purpose of ritual is to bring one across the threshold of their everyday consciousness of reality into the alternate reality where they may become aware of the presence of the gods. Ritual is a tool, a means of effecting a change in the perceptions of the practitioner, and as such it is useful to employ. Another aspect of properly conducted ritual is that it is beneficial in preparing one for what is met on the other side. Once one enters the other realms there is no surety in what may be encountered, and just as you would dress properly for the weather, or don armour when entering into battle, ritual provides a means of protective method of entering the mystical. One does not engage in a full ritual without proper preparation, purification, and proper precaution being taken first. Most importantly perhaps is that ritual involving harmonizing oneself to the Universe effects upon their very being, so that one continues this harmonious relationship afterwards and walks in the ways of the gods. For all those reasons ritual is not only useful but essential in the practise of the religio romana.
The manner of your questions are philosophical in nature, and can thus only be answered from a philosophical perspective. But true understanding is not made through intellectual exercise alone. Study, for all of its importance, is only one activity that may bring one into a comprehension of divinity, when coupled with other pursuits. I would place more emphasis on the practice of the religio and the mystical elements of its ritual to harmonize one's nature to that of the Universe, thus gaining an awareness of the gods. Videre est credere, experientia docet. But study of the ancient philosophies, and practice of the ancient rites will not alone bring about an encounter with the gods. There is also an ethical aspect of the religio, living in the ways of the gods, which for me is the most important. Plotinus, in the second tractate of the first Ennead, states, "The solution is in understanding the virtues and what each has to give; thus the man will learn to work with this or that as every several need demands; and as he reaches loftier principles and other standards these in turn will define his conduct; ...he will live, nolonger, the human life of the good man...but leaving this beneath him, will take up instead another life, that of the Gods." The three divine principles of Being, Intelligence and Life, expressed in ourselves as body, mind and soul, must each be worked with progressively. While younger we may place more emphasis on the physical body to maintain a healthy vehicle for mind and soul in this life, later it becomes more important to strengthen the pneumatic body that will be the vehicle to carry one back to their origin. Likewise with the mind and soul, at different stages of life what is required in preparing for the next stage of existence shall alter. As those parts of mind, body, and soul that are of limited being will eventually expire, the other parts that participate in the infinite shall be carried aloft to encounter the divine, the results of which will depend upon one's preparation in this life. That does not mean that I subscribe to the notion that one is to be judged before the gods, meted out reward or punishment, but relates to a different perspective of the Universe and one's role in the divine design of it. One may say then that proper study, proper ritual and proper conduct all contribute to attaining a knowledge of one's relationship to the Universe, and piety is the proper exercise of each in proportion.
* * *
Di vos semper bene ament
M Horatius Piscinus
Sapere aude!
Sapere aude!
-
Horatius Piscinus - Curialis
- Posts: 1194
- Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 7:39 am
- Location: Ohio, USA
by Horatius Piscinus on Mon Nov 10, 2003 4:10 pm
Salvete
Perhaps I should try to translate these initial principles or preconceived notions
1. That all things known, or otherwise that can be known, have Being, an existence in reality. But what then is Being? The notion of Being can not be defined in a strict sense. Being is that which exists or at least what can exist, or else it is something attributed to have ordinary existence, whether the most complex or simplest of things, and which everyone are in agreement of its existence. Everything everywhere either is or it is not. Being is whatever is other than Nothing. Therefore absolute Nothingness or pure Nothingness cannot exist within the whole of Being.
2. Creation is the proposition that all things having substance were produced from Nothing. But it is a well-known axiom, held without any doubt that; ?From Nothing comes nothing.? This is affirmed by universal experience. Therefore creation is not a possibility.
.
3. Everything that exists in reality or that potentially can exist is unique within itself, and is contained within its own particular boundaries, so that all things are distinguishable from all other things. Thus an infinite number of things are present amidst Perfect Being, discerned within Being by its own limits, whether springing directly from Being itself or extended from some other thing that originate in Being. As our Epicurian Lucretius says, ?Nothing ever truly dies, seeing the nature of the soul possessed by mortals.?
Valete optime
Perhaps I should try to translate these initial principles or preconceived notions
M Moravi Horati Piscine wrote:
Praenotiones:
1) Id omnes, quo aliquid intellegitur vel intellegi potest, ens habent. Quinam ens est? Notio entis stricte definiri non potest. Ens est id, quod exsistit vel saltem exsistere potest, vel, ens est aliquid ad exsistendum ordinatum, maxime indeterminatum, simplicissimum, in quo omnia conveniunt. Quaelibet res aut est, aut non est. Ens est id, quod non est nihilum. Nihilum absolutum vel merum nihilum est absentia totius entis.
2) Creatio enim est productio totius substantiae ex nihilo. Sed, <<ex nihilo nihil fit>>: est axioma ab omnibus indubitanter acceptum et evidenti experientia universali firmatum. Ergo creatio est impossibilis.
3) Omnia, quae revera exsistunt et quae possunt exsistere, in suo esse determinata sunt modis specialibus essendi, quibus allia ab aliis distinguuntur. Sic omnes intersunt ens infinite perfectum et ens in suo esse limitatum, uter ab fonte entis bis extendent. Epicurus noster Lucretius inquit: "Nihil igitur mors est, quoniam natura animi habetur mortalis."
1. That all things known, or otherwise that can be known, have Being, an existence in reality. But what then is Being? The notion of Being can not be defined in a strict sense. Being is that which exists or at least what can exist, or else it is something attributed to have ordinary existence, whether the most complex or simplest of things, and which everyone are in agreement of its existence. Everything everywhere either is or it is not. Being is whatever is other than Nothing. Therefore absolute Nothingness or pure Nothingness cannot exist within the whole of Being.
2. Creation is the proposition that all things having substance were produced from Nothing. But it is a well-known axiom, held without any doubt that; ?From Nothing comes nothing.? This is affirmed by universal experience. Therefore creation is not a possibility.
.
3. Everything that exists in reality or that potentially can exist is unique within itself, and is contained within its own particular boundaries, so that all things are distinguishable from all other things. Thus an infinite number of things are present amidst Perfect Being, discerned within Being by its own limits, whether springing directly from Being itself or extended from some other thing that originate in Being. As our Epicurian Lucretius says, ?Nothing ever truly dies, seeing the nature of the soul possessed by mortals.?
Valete optime
M Horatius Piscinus
Sapere aude!
Sapere aude!
-
Horatius Piscinus - Curialis
- Posts: 1194
- Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 7:39 am
- Location: Ohio, USA
by Horatius Piscinus on Mon Nov 10, 2003 4:25 pm
Salvete
Theology is a branch of philosophy that attempts to give rational explanation to something that is irrational and unexplainable. The first problem here is trying to translate what is meant by Ens. The term comes from 'mens' meaning mind and might be translated as the Divine Mind or the Inteelectual Principle, but I have preferred to use Being as it expresses more than just the conception Platonic ideas held in potentiality. Ens is the source of what we commonly think of as reality, and philosophically it is very difficult to explain what reality is.
If you do try to give an rational explanation for such things as Being, reality and so on, you come to a point where everything either comes from some source outside reality or you come to a view that is pantheistic. I do not think either position is correct, or that we can even come up with some clear notion on what could be the truth. The problem is expressed in Plato's Parmenides between the One and the One that Is. In the Septugint the Hebrew text usually translated into English as "I am who am" instead used Plato's "I am the One that is" Thus the monotheists took the position of everything being created from nothing, 'Ex nihi , and simply ignored what Plato had said. Plato's 'God over All,' I feel, is neither the One nor the One that Is, but the dialectic resolution of the two propositions Plato posed in the Parmenides
Valete optime
Theology is a branch of philosophy that attempts to give rational explanation to something that is irrational and unexplainable. The first problem here is trying to translate what is meant by Ens. The term comes from 'mens' meaning mind and might be translated as the Divine Mind or the Inteelectual Principle, but I have preferred to use Being as it expresses more than just the conception Platonic ideas held in potentiality. Ens is the source of what we commonly think of as reality, and philosophically it is very difficult to explain what reality is.
If you do try to give an rational explanation for such things as Being, reality and so on, you come to a point where everything either comes from some source outside reality or you come to a view that is pantheistic. I do not think either position is correct, or that we can even come up with some clear notion on what could be the truth. The problem is expressed in Plato's Parmenides between the One and the One that Is. In the Septugint the Hebrew text usually translated into English as "I am who am" instead used Plato's "I am the One that is" Thus the monotheists took the position of everything being created from nothing, 'Ex nihi , and simply ignored what Plato had said. Plato's 'God over All,' I feel, is neither the One nor the One that Is, but the dialectic resolution of the two propositions Plato posed in the Parmenides
Valete optime
M Horatius Piscinus
Sapere aude!
Sapere aude!
-
Horatius Piscinus - Curialis
- Posts: 1194
- Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 7:39 am
- Location: Ohio, USA
4 posts • Page 1 of 1
Return to Collegium Religionum et Philosophiarum
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests