Democratic Forest Trusts (PDF)in Watson, Alan; Dean, Liese; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2006. Science and stewardship to protect and sustain wilderness values: Eighth World Wilderness Congress Symposium; 2005 September 30-October 6; Anchorage, AK.Democratic trusts with leadership elected by citizen-members promise to solve many of the problems afflicting both traditional government and corporate ownership of forestlands. This article explores these issues in some depth.Complexity and the Dream of Human Control of Eco-Systems (PDF)in Watson, Alan; Dean, Liese; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2006. Science and stewardship to protect and sustain wilderness values: Eighth World Wilderness Congress Symposium; 2005 September 30-October 6; Anchorage, AK.The title captures it. I then explore the kinds of institutions compatible with both nature and the modern world that are implied from this analysis.Rethinking the Obvious: Modernity and Living Respectfully With Nature (PDF)The Trumpeter: Journal of Ecosophy, Winter, 1997.Modernity is usually considered a wrong turn in terms of respect for and sustaining the environment. I argue the reality is more complex, for modernity has freed us from personal dependence on agriculture, ended the economic value of children, radically reduced the likelihood of large scale wat, and shifted much production to intellectual rather than material capital. This partially decouples society from nature, which gives us important opportunities as well as problems.Towards an Ecocentric Political Economy (PDF)The Trumpeter, Fall, 1996.This paper begins my effort at showing how liberal modernity can be harmonized with an ecocentric perspective on our relationship with the natural world. It is a corrective to much “free market environmental” literature that sacrifices Nature to money as well as to anti-liberal attacks by well-meaning but economically naïve environmentalists.Unexpected Harmonies: Self-Organization in Liberal Modernity and Ecology (PDF)The Trumpeter, Journal of Ecosophy, 10:1, Winter 1993This is my initial paper exploring how what I term ‘evolutionary liberal’ thought can be an important means by which society and nature can be brought into greater harmony. The other Trumpeter papers build on it.Deep Ecology and Liberalism: The Greener Implications of Evolutionary Liberalism (PDF)Review of Politics, Fall, 1996.Liberal thought and deep ecology are usually regarded as mutually exclusive. But the “evolutionary” tradition offers a way to integrate the two through commonalties in the work of David Hume, Michael Polanyi, Arne Naess, and Aldo Leopold, providing a stronger foundation for liberalism while strengthening the case for an ecocentric ethic.(Related subjects: Ecology)Saving Western Towns: A Jeffersonian Green Proposal (PDF)in Writers on the Range, Karl Hess and John Baden, eds., University Press of Colorado, 1998.Developmental pressures in the rural and small town West involve three groups: long term residents, new arrivals, and environmentalists. Today their interests often conflict. This conflict is in part the outcome of institutions which prevent harmonizing competing interests. The concept of developmental trusts, both for rural regions and for small communities offers a means whereby these interests can be harmonized for the benefit of all concerned.(Related subjects: Politics)Social Ecology, Deep Ecology, and Liberalism (PDF)Critical Review, 6: 2-3, 1992.Murray Bookchin is considered a leading radical environmental theorist. However, his analysis is incapable of leading humankind towards a more respectful and sustainable relationship with the natural world. Criticisms of Bookchin from both the deep ecology and evolutionary liberal perspective complement one another, pointing the way towards a better understanding of how modernity relates to the environment.The paper as a whole offers an early discussion of issues that are more clearly addressed in later papers, particularly Deep Ecology and Liberalism (1996) and the three Trumpeter articles in 1997, 1996, and 1993. However, there are other ideas in the article which have not been developed more thoroughly elsewhere.
Brandy Williams was Theurgicon’s second presenter. She focused on the second set of texts most associated with this branch of Neoplatonism, the Chaldean Oracles. They were the final part of the Hermetic tradition to develop, during the 2nd and
3rd centuries C.E.
These teachings presented a “road map” of spiritual reality and the material world’s relationship to it. In important respects it was a hierarchical view, extending from our world ultimately to the First Principle.
The First Principle which I believe is also called “the One,” a Non Dual concept, creates the intelligible order. Within this order the Demiurge gives shape to it and the World Soul mediates between ourselves and these first two intellects. The Oracles identified the World Soul as Hekate.
At the next level is the realm of Teletarchs, when we encounter them hey appear as friendly guides. This realm of Teletarchs has three levels. The first and closest to the Demiurge is the Empyrean World. It is ruled by love. A step further away from the source of all is the Ethereal World, which is ruled by truth. Finally there is the material world, which is ruled by faith.
If I understand correctly (these concepts are very complex) beings Christians would identify as angels and demons, or many Pagans would identify as powers of the elements and the like, are archons which, unlike teletarchs, are not always friendly. Ancient Gnostics saw us as imprisoned by the archons in the material world whereas many Neoplatonists, such as Plotinus, had a far more favorable view of materiality and presumably also of archons.
Williams gave considerably more detail about these realms, but I think the basic point is that we are in a divine hierarchy and can evolve personally the best by seeking connection further up the hierarchy. Ultimately it ends in the One of NonDual mystical experience, or perhaps some other concept of a One.
The levels of reality are in a chain of being from the One to the most individuated and material. This view can apparently be interpreted in two ways. In the first, favored by Christian interpretations of Neoplatonism, the model is strictly hierarchical. In the second, which appeared favored by the presenter, and was argued for explicitly by Don Frew, there there was no true separation between these levels. Or rather, like a rainbow, if the One is light, all is light, but at different frequencies.
This latter view in particular meant that with proper preparation the soul could make contact at many levels whereas the first would emphasize the gap between transcendence and the material. This matter of interpretation is important, for if there is a deep gulf between them, we cannot get there from here, all action has to come from above. On the other hand, if there is constant connection, with proper preparation one can.
Theurgic Techniques
Theurgy, “God-work” was important because, as Iamblichus taught, through it humans had contact with the divine, and so could be transformed. This process could be accomplished by means of three techniques. First were animated statues working on the magickal principle of sympathy. Anyone understanding how to do sympathetic magick has a sense of this. For example in attracting solar power the use of sunflowers, amber, and gold can be used. Elements in a working connected with its target increase the likelihood of success.
Also involved were “magickal words” and magickal instruments such as the “lynges” a kind of wheel that was apparently spun, producing a particular sound. Here it was clear that Theurgy was deeply connected to ritual as well as to what today is called philosophy. This is a natural outgrowth of the view there are no insuperable gulfs between the various levels or dimensions of the Neoplatonic spiritual map.
Another technique Williams termed “binding and loosing” or “calling and receiving.”
In such cases the deity manifested through a medium (bound) and then departed (loosed).
Finally there was the philosopher’s direct encounter with deities, where I presume unlike mediumship the person remained conscious throughout the process, and so was personally enriched spiritually.
Williams described the role these works and the concepts they taught played in the lives of Neoplatonic philosophers such as Proclus, Iamblichus, and Hypatia. One interesting point she emphasized was that while the status of women was low in Pagan antiquity, this was not the case among Neoplatonists.
Her presentation also provided enough recommended citations to keep someone with the time busy for months, if not years. I wish I had enough to do the matter justice. As there are plans to make this material available on line, Williams’ list will hopefully enrich the reading of all Pagans interested in these matters.
My Reactions
I am constitutionally suspicious of hierarchical understandings of reality. They have had nasty political consequences, feed a lot of egos that believe they are “more evolved,” and I suspect constitute an attempt to apply models of relationship from agricultural societies that viewed nature and people as something to control to a spiritual realm. Consequently I am most sympathetic to the less rigid models of dimensions that is a possible interpretation of this reality.
I believe this less hierarchical interpretation also fits better with my and other peoples reports of mystical encounters in their various forms. I would hope that less hierarchical forms of description will come to predominate. My own working model is of a multidimensional tapestry where the closer one approaches “the One” the less differentiation exists and the farther one goes the more differentiation can be seen, maximizing the opportunities for love to manifest. But it is all one tapestry.
The issue of animated statues is one that I need to see to really believe, and there are people working on the concept. The same concept apparently exists in India today, evidence that in Pagan times there was no sharp distinction between West and East such as exists today. Catholic pictures of Mary sometimes reportedly shed tears and pictures of Jesus apparently sometimes bleed.
I am told that there are reports by skeptical Pagans as well as Christians of seeing such statues levitate. Both thought lodestones were involved. But when I later asked a geologist friend whether lodestones were strong enough to levitate a statue, he said not to his knowledge, and if they were given the shape of the field, the statue would tip over.
The other two forms of theurgy would appear to be very familiar to people experienced with African Diasporic religions, and some Asian traditions where ancestors rather than nonhuman spirits arrive in entranced mediums. My own teacher in a Brazilian tradition said he taught the third form, where you remained conscious while the entity was present, and so benefitted from the experience far more than a medium would, who would not be aware. In my experience that is true.
posted September 30, 2010 at 3:47 pm
Hi Gus:
This is a fascinating series of posts. Thanks for taking the time to pass on the observations from the conference. A few observations:
I’m not convinced that Plotinus had a ‘more favorable’ view of materiality. His view of material existence was, as far as I can tell, negative; that is to say materiality was something to overcome. There is one significant exception: beauty. Both Plato and Plotinus regarded beauty as a sign of the transcendental permeating the material. Still, one has to overcome the specific material manifestation in order to perceive beauty as such in order for beauty to function in a way that leads to gnosis.
I would also be interested in knowing what is the basis for the claim that women had a higher status among Neoplatonists than classical society in general. Is there any data to support that, or any specific passages from the Neoplatonic tradition? I can think of one, from Plato’s Republic, where Plato argues that women should have access to political power. This was a very radical stance at the time. But I am not aware that Plato applied this understanding to his actual school.
Regarding animated statues; when I studied in East Asia one of the ceremonies I learned was called “eye-opening” and it is used when installing a statue at a Temple. The idea is that a statue has many of the features of a ‘deity’ (or in this case a ‘Buddha’), but it lacks consciousness or awareness. Through the eye-opening ceremony the statue becomes conscious or aware. At least this is the theory.
Best wishes,
Jim
posted September 30, 2010 at 5:06 pm
Jim: “I’m not convinced that Plotinus had a ‘more favorable’ view of materiality.”
The Platonic view of the physical world was spelled out by Plato himself in his cosmological masterpiece, the Timaeus.
According to the Timaeus, the following are all true of the physical world:
(1) the physical universe is an orderly Whole, that is, a Kosmos.
(2) the Cosmos is blessed, divine, and ensouled.
(3) the Cosmos is a living being.
(4) this living being is conscious, intelligent, and purposeful in its actions.
(5) the Cosmos is populated by a variety of Divine beings including Gods and Daimones.
(6) the human soul is itself a kind of divine being in it’s own right — that is, the human psyche (mind/soul) is of the same variety of being as the Gods.
Also found in the Timaeus (and other works, especially the Symposium and the Phaedrus) is the theoretical basis for what came to be known as the doctrine of “cosmic sympathy”. The explicit working out of this theory was due first to the Stoic interpretation of the Timaeus, but the Stoic terminology (especially the word “sumpatheia” itself).
Interestingly, the Latin word “compassio” is not a native Latin word at all, but is rather a “loan translation” of the Greek philosophical term “sumpatheia”. In other words, our word “compassion” has its origins in Platonic cosmology.
It would be hard to imagine a more “positive” view of the physical world than the one found in Platonism. Of course Platonists do not, like Christian Scientists or some others, deny the reality of the material world, including the reality of the various kinds of pain and suffering that are found here. And, ultimately, whatever pleasures we find in the material world will all be lost to us. But those are just the facts of life.
posted September 30, 2010 at 5:09 pm
oops — in the third from last para the last sentence shoulda been:
“The explicit working out of this theory was due first to the Stoic interpretation of the Timaeus, but the Stoic terminology (especially the word “sumpatheia” itself) HAD BEEN ADOPTED BY THE PLATONISTS BY THE TIME OF PLOTINUS.”
posted September 30, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Apuleius:
Excellent response. Thank you. I suspect I was confusing some of the personal aspects of Plotinus’ life with Platonism as a whole. I think in support of your interpretation of the positive view of materiality is Plotinus’ conception of a ‘world soul’; a view he refers to in which the earth itself is ensouled. I always found those parts of the Enneads very inspiring, but for some reason they slipped my mind in my initial post.
Thanks,
Jim
posted September 30, 2010 at 9:47 pm
Jim, to tell you the truth, I always get a little creeped out reading certain passages of Porphyry’s Life of Plotinus. It does appear that Porphyry himself either had some real personal issues with “the flesh” or he was following a set pattern in the hagiographical customs of the times. He does go out of his way to emphasize how much, he claims, Plotinus hated to “be in the body.”
The Plotinian World Soul of the Enneads is a beautiful and inspiring teaching, for sure. And it is right out of Plato, as well. But Platonism was a living tradition that required flesh and blood teachers living it as well as teaching it, so I don’t mean to take anything away from Plotinus’ contribution. He wasn’t just aping Plato, that’s for sure.
posted October 1, 2010 at 11:14 am
I think that hierarchical understandings may vary–or that we can vary them–along the dimension of power over or control from the higher levels. I, too, get restless with autocratic hierarchies of deities, angels, spirits, demons, the wandering ghosts, and all. Maybe imagining all these entities as having different specific gravities offers a way of thinking about hierarchies without making power fundamental.
And I wonder whether the One may actually include something other than an essence of universal allness. There seem to be SIX types of quarks, for instance.
posted October 1, 2010 at 4:58 pm
Let’s distinguish between two meanings of the term “animated statue”: animated meaning moving around, and animated meaning containing a soul (anima in Latin).
There’s firm archaeological evidence that some of the moving statues in Egyptian temples were operated by hydraulic machinery. The Greeks possessed this technology and may have used it as well.
I have had some strong experiences of being in the presence of statues that felt aware and awake to me. When the Art Museum of the University of California at Berkeley first opened, it had on permanent display a full sized ancient statue of Sekhmet carved from black rock. That statue contained a presence. Thirty years later, I attended a Khemetic ritual in honor of Bast. At the end of the ritual, each of us had an opportunity for an audience with a life sized cat statue (a modern reproduction). The statue seemed to be looking right out at me with the personality of a goddess, not a house cat. I asked the priestess about that a few minutes later and she confirmed that she had ensouled (not her terminology) the statue.
When I was a child (late Fifties), my parents took me to the Japanese Tea Garden in Golden Gate Park and I was struck by the powerful emanations from the bronze statue of the Buddha there, which most likely had been removed from a shrine less than seventy years before. Not a human personality, just a force of some kind, neutral or beneficent. This was one of my earliest psychic experiences; I said nothing to my parents about it. In this instance, it’s possible that what I was feeling was a stored charge from the many worshippers who had gazed at the statue, rather than from the Buddha himself.
posted October 2, 2010 at 1:19 pm
Very interesting Deborah, and something to which I can relate. Places and things have their own energy presence in my experience – usually of little notice because, from my perspective, everything does. But because presence/energy has a mental component it can be directed. After all, energy healing is often just that – manipulating energy patterns from the outside with other energy patterns.
If energy has different levels of ‘vibration’ – and I am convinced it does – a mind of sufficient quality can invest something with a dose of that energy/vibration. Is the mind that of the priestess with Bast? I doubt that is the full story. Maybe also the mind/presence of Bast? Priestess plus deity in other words. I don’t think that makes the statue the deity, but the statue is a kind of node in the deity’s field of manifestation, or from another perspective, an entry point from wherever the deity exists to this plane of existence.
I’m just running off at the keyboard this morning, but such a model seems to me to unite a great deal of psychic/spiritual phenomena, from places of Power to why some sacred buildings are particularly powerful to the magickal ‘charging’ of objects to the spiritual invoking of presences/powers into objects to energy healing.
In addition, my earlier posts on seeing (I cannot find this in search – I’ll post a new one) and feeling energy http://blog.beliefnet.com/apagansblog/2009/04/feeling-energy.html might be relevant here as well.
It MIGHT provide a means to understand why a statue might move, a painting might weep, and so on – but who knows? I don’t.
Gus
Pingback: The Wild Hunt » Pagan Community Notes: A Pagan Festival in Israel, TheurgiCon, and More!