Monday, January 31, 2011

notes/layout for Dionysius bit



Why are angels a "problem" for Dionysius?
they translate the emanations from an ineffable Godhead
and illuminate man who does not have capacity to receive.
passivity of Dionysian interaction with angels no different in Pico?

when Pico describes the life of angels as a contemplative one he doesn't
explain much because he's taking for granted Dionysian notions (blanks get filled by angel magic interpretations)
angelic theoria - contemplation of angels is better than humans b/c not discursive, but worse than God still needs ritual--angels do theurgy on each other
angelic illumination points to passivity of things illuminated, but doing the illuminating makes angels godlike

Dionysius did not lift Neoplatonic angelology unaltered, but adapts Neoplatonic principles to his new and original view.
Dionysian hierarchy is not the same hierarchy
theurgy language an inspiration for the way angels do providential and anagogical work, but Christology changes the angel hierarchy considerably
Dionysius' system is not a thin veneer of Christianity pasted onto Neoplatonism, but a reworking. Pico's interest in Neoplatonism can be compared--he's not trying to import, but to transform and Christianize like Dionysius did.

Sunday, January 30, 2011

Wear on Dionysius - God and Angel as Henad




Wear/Dillon 73 PD "refers to God, among a string of other epithets, as a "henad unifying every henad." With this one phrase he seems to betray a knowledge of the whole later Neoplatonic system, according to which the One contains within itself, and gives unity to, a multiplicity of entities which have not yet properly proceeded forth from it. What Dionysius has in mind here is not clear, since he has no use for a system of henads as such. However, later in the work, at DN 892D, we find the most interesting phrase "the immortal lives of the angelic henads," which the power of God preserves "unharmed."

How can it be that Dionysius refers to the angels as "henads," since by definition they have proceeded forth from God? ...Dionysius has adopted Porphyry's view of the relation between the subjects of the first two hypotheses of the Parmenides, which makes the subject of the second hypothesis also God in his creative and procreative aspect, enabling Dionysius to introduce the Trinity within the realm of the One. The divine classes of entity depicted there will therefore still count as "henads," as being intimately connected with God, despite their various degrees of plurality.
On the other hand, however, the three triads of angelic beings in the celestial hierarchy can be assimilated also to the three levels of beings distinguished within the realm of Intellect, first by Iamblichus, and then after him, more elaborately, by Syrianus and Proclus. Dionysius is not, of course, concerned to reproduce as such the distinction between the intelligible, intelligible-intellective and intellective levels of being, but he does make it clear that his three levels of angelic being differ in degrees of purity and illumination, thus differentiating them in an analogous manner to the Neoplatonic entities. So we may conclude, after all, that these inhabitants of the Dionysian universe are enjoying the best of both levels of being.
n.86 J.P. Sheldon-Williams (1972) has postulated a relationship between PD's use of variations of the term "henad" and the NP concept of henad, drawing a relationship between henad and Form for PD

more subsection outlines




Pico's Proclus
1. Crofton Black on importance of Proclus in Heptaplus
2. Edelheit? Proclus gets the most conclusions -- digesting sentences work alone impressive philosophical contribution, but he's interpreting and arranging in meaningful ways, showing us things about his philosophical motivations
3. Pico is looking at "angelology" of Proclus, really what Dionysius took from Proclus and creatively applied to angelology
4. Pico is making creative use of neoplatonism just as Dionysius did.
5. Pico is spinning Proclus by selectively using as source for angelology, theological themes of Dionysius -- just as contemporary scholars spin Proclus as proto-Christian "mystical theology and angelology" in explaining Proclus influence on Dionysius
6. Pico explores theme of participation
7. Syrianus in Plato Conclusions (from Proclus) "theology" confirms Dionysius on CH->EH, more on metaphysics of orders
8. Pico doesn't select theurgic material of Proclus (for whom angelology wasn't a big deal, didn't even use archangel of Iamblichus)
9. Pico uses certain metaphysical principles of Proclus, but doesn't read his metaphysics in Neoplatonic spirit, gives Christianized Proclus translated into angelology and scholastic format philosophical theology

Pico and Neoplatonic angelology
1. Dionysius and logic of triads.
2. Participation
3.



Heptaplus
1. Angelology extracted using hermeneutics - Crofton Black
2. development of Angel Mind from Commento
3. development of Angel Comparison from Oration
4. Angelic imperfection (Number) leads to De Ente









Conclusions
1. what it is
2. Dougherty on scholastic forms
3. Craven on interpretations making too much of "hints"
4. Edelheit on Apology, probability vs. faith
5. scholastic angelology
6. Kabbalist angelology
7. Encounter with Neoplatonic angelology less studied than scholastic and kabbalistic strands
8. Influence of Neoplatonists on Dionysian angelology.
9. Dionysius made use of Proclan triads, which Pico studies here.

Commento
1. "begins with ontological preoccupation"
2. angelic level of being
3. Angelic Mind is Neoplatonic Intelligible
4. Plotinus vs. Dionysius
5. Angelic Mind as first created thing
6. Angelic Mind and the Forms
7. Angel Comparison in Commento consistent with Oration.
8. (Kabbalah in Commento merely example of esoteric transmission, makes no impact on angel metaphysics--kabbalah is an esoteric source of angel metaphysics)

Saturday, January 29, 2011

outline of Pico's Iamblichus bit



Pico's Iamblichus
1. In Oration "occult philosophy" doesn't mean what it meant after Agrippa
2. in Oration authority on Pythagoras, golden chain of philosophy
3. Conclusions - Plato's unparticipated soul placed in the middle of the world. Iamblichean innovation on theology - unparticipated One explaining individuality of things - applied to thinking about cosmic soul
4. Conclusions - numeration of Binah -- neoplatonic number theory linked to Kabbalah, theology of number (philosophical topic) as well as practical magic/theurgy of number
5. Conclusions - "no force in celestial stars is evil" recalls Dionysius' debt to Proclus on evil.
6. Heptaplus - Iamblichus linked to bible quote and Christian spirituality, notion of needing a higher power (Iamblichus on gods/superior beings becomes Dionysian angels)
7. De Ente - Pico finds Dionysian/Thomistic approach better resolution of Aristotle/Plato problem than Iamblichus on prime matter.
8. Pico sees Pico as a pious metaphysician and mystical theologian, not an idolatrous sorceror or occultist.
9. Pico ignores Iamblichus on theurgy, focuses on philosophical side, "divine Jam" as pioneer of late Neoplatonic theology and angelology principles

Angelology and Kabbalah in Pico's Heptaplus


Does Pico's Heptaplus represent an abrupt shift from the "Angel Comparison" of Oration, or a continuation of the same basic angelology? Scholars have remarked on the lack of magic, now-silent use of Kabbalah, and emphasis on the limitations of man present in the Heptaplus. Do these elements make it different from the "becoming angel" system of Oration? If we don't understand what Pico is doing in Oration and Conclusions as angel magic, then understanding Heptaplus as a consistent development of earlier angelology foundation is much easier, makes much more sense. Kabbalah is not being abandoned, but revealed for what Pico takes it as--an esoteric hermeneutics which teaches how to discover theology, cosmology, and angel metaphysics in the text of Moses. Looking at what Pico is doing with angel in Commento helps contextualize how angelology in 900 Conclusions leads to developments in Heptaplus. Pico is still working with a concept of Angelic Mind, drawing on Plotninian insights of Dionysius for this as well as Proclan ones he uses to discuss hierarchical cosmos.

Pico says he will not explore the Hebrew concept of angels, but rather spends his time remarking on how the Dionysian concept of angels can be found in the biblical text. It is when he links the Angel to the concept of Number that he gets into territory reminiscent of Proclan and Iamblichean theology of Number, although he's clearly making arguments in the light of Dionysian and Thomistic developments in order to defend and confirm Christian theology. Neoplatonic theories of Number are no longer being used to understand the radical individuality of gods, which would be a problematic approach to angels for Pico, but rather the unique ontological status of Number is used to build a concept of angel as having an exalted but ultimately imperfect ontological status. Angelic Mind is first created thing, but deficient to God like Number is to One.

more Pico and Iamblichean/Proclan angel




presence of the angels plays a limited role in Proclan/Iamblichan theurgy, appropriate to their place in hierarchy. no new center for Pico.

Bradshaw: tendency in Proclus to understand procession and return in less dynamic terms than Plotinus

radical individuality of henads/gods in pagan polytheist late neoplatonism mitigated by Christian theological constraints when app to angel

Pico sees faith and prayer driving the mystical ascent of Iamblichus and Proclus, not ritual magic or angel conjuring.

Thus for Proclus faith (pistis), necessary for theurgy and mystic experience, becomes more important

a superficially Christianized version of the theological and angelological speculations of Proclus http://bit.ly/f2nFsq

This is the itinerary of Gnostic angelology (particularly in its theurgical aspects), http://bit.ly/eLFlNE Cacciari, the necessary angel

theological reflection on angels came to be measured against new conceptions/Against metaphysicizing+naturalistic conception of angelology,

Proclus is more interested in Homer's support for his own elaborate angelology+demonology than in his support for Pythagorean dualism.

in particular Dionysius' angelology seems too reminiscent of the Athenian School's order of gods.

In its purest form it helped to give theological expression to Christian dogma regarding the Godhead; in a more dubious shape it helped to systematize angelology and psychology.

At Variance: Marsilio Ficino, Platonism, and Heresy http://bit.ly/dVBd5r Michael J.B. Allen

Al-Suhrawardi interpreted the theory os Platonic Ideas in terms of Zoroastrian angelology

Louth: "it looks as if Denys's distinctive contribution to Christian angelology is of Neoplatonic inspiration." http://bit.ly/dME676

Angelology has no place in the system of Plotinus. According to Iamblichus, Plato did not consider archangels worth mention

Iamblichus provides explanations for the workings of divination, which in its best form involves divine illumination.

Shaw, "Iamblichus argued that each divine genre defined itself, and its activity neither exhausted nor determined ... "

while I don't want to get too bogged down with theurgic/occultist interpretations, I do need to spend some time w/ Pico's magic+KBL, "hints"
sacrifices directed towards angels have an angel presiding http://bit.ly/i7SGCo Iamblichus De Mysteriis V.25 p.273

But of course Iamblichus could have denied separate existence to such beings, had he been so inclined

Dillon's list of Proclus Elements of Theology concepts that Dodds traced to Iamblichus http://bit.ly/dEYOIy

"can ascend to rank of angels" is first mention of angels http://bit.ly/gvQTHo Dillon again

Iamblichus distinguishes demons from gods http://bit.ly/hwaKF4 Iamblichi Chalcidensis By John M. Dillon, Iamblichus 16 minutes

even in Iamblichean theurgy humans who "become angels" don't become better than the gods, would be a mistake to say Pico's resorting to this

Pico seems to be trying to constrain interpretation of Kabbalah to licit, orthodox, Christian speculative philosophy--clearly he failed.

Since Pico only hinted at profitable research that might be made into Kabbalah as source for Dionysian mysticism, later Cabalists freely dug

Pico may have had an ingenious plan to explain Kabbalistic angel in terms of Dionysian neoplatonic angelology as he promised, but he didn't.

In any case Pico doesn't deal much with Kabbalistic angel lore/doesn't give us enough information to judge how it fits into his own "system"

Kabbalah may resonate with Pico's Neoplatonism, mysticism, magic, but he's reaching when he claims to discover same metaphysics of angels in

for Pico to be singled out as having a problematic attitude toward angels requires some explaining, but I have not encountered such an expl.

"The Iamblichan cosmos was therefore a magical one,populated by a great diversity of superhuman spiritual beings,influencing natural events"

when Pico mentions abstract/concrete being in de ente cite Mark Delp paper

Gersh 169 Angels 'have simple and blessed cognition . . . human souls possess rationality discursively' http://bit.ly/h55dVQ

Pico is working with Proclan principles already Christianized by Dionysius, mapped+analyzed by Aquinas, before he finds more stuff in Procl.

RT @EPButler Specifically, angels in pagan NP are divinized intelligences, daimons divinized immortal souls, heroes divinized mortal souls.
RT @EPButler If not Proclus, via Ps-D, then who? It's just that Ps-D's angelology comes, not from P's angelology, but his henadology,tweaked
RT @EPButler Since he uses the term "angel", yes. Granted, there's not much there, but it is part of the architecture of his system.
RT @EPButler Xtian ideas about angels prior to Ps-D may have more in common with Proclus' thought about angels than that coming after.
@EPButler Dionysius looks at angels/God in a more Proclan way than Thomas Aquinas did when interpreting Dionysius in ST, Pico follows Thomas
@EPButler my guy Pico definitely sees angels in the Dionysian-Thomistic way, and I don't think he's trying to go back to Proclan henadology.
@EPButler That's interesting about earlier ideas--can you say more or refer me? Have you read Arthur on Ps-D as Polemicist? But as for Pico-
@EPButler angels don't play same architectural role in Proclus as in PD? was angel important to Iamblichus? or just yet another class of ent
@EPButler what's interesting to me is how much Proclus is there to fill in the blanks left by tiny biblical angel traditions, for Dionysius.

Iamblichus' Hierarchy of Spiritual Entities http://www.kheper.net/topics/Neoplatonism/Iamblich-beings.htm

there is a number proceeding from each of the principle hypostases http://bit.ly/gU8MHp

how are angels and daemons said to energise providentially

lamblichus replies that it is impossible to perform divine works without the assistance of a god [i.e. not merely an angel] ibid

If one is to obtain participation in the divine light, the recurrent theme of Proclus' hymns, one has to fully ... http://bit.ly/em8GIp

Iamblichus (Taylor): God, who is thus invoked in the sacrifices, is their author, +the gods+angels around him constitute ...

"And about every God there is an appropriate number of angels, heroes and daemons" Proclus, Platonic Theology http://bit.ly/eZ9sjd

Proclus, "For what the monad is among gods, this a number is among angels" http://bit.ly/ifgcT7 Timaeus commentary p.233

going to bed early, waking up in the middle of the night, is like finding the secret bonus levels of sleep

Dionysius' angelology was also sculpted by those approaches he rejected--especially alchemical/hermetic/magical angel traditions(see Arthur)

# xxxv While the theurgist may, at his most elevated, ascend to the order of angels... he can never be regarded as above+beyond status of gods

Dionysian angel predates, can't be reduced to his choice to use Proclan mechanics/henad to philosophize about?

"philosophical exegesis is not all that was going on in Dick’s life and mind in this period"

@EPButler Would you call the discussion of divinized intelligences in Proclus an "angelology" simply b/c he uses the word angel?

@EPButler I'm not saying PD's angelology doesn't come from Proclus (sure does), just that he doesn't quite mean the same thing by angel.

honest commentators have admitted that Pico's uses of Kabbalistic lore of angels are inscrutable, Copenhaver on system int is out on a limb?

Angels don't play anything like same role in Neoplatonism b/c different theological needs, angel not used to set divine apart as transcend.

Angelology is anachronistic term applied to pagan Neoplatonists, who spoke of gods, with angels a lower level--wouldn't be same angelology.

Like Aquinas+Dionysius, Pico talks about angels as images of God, functionaries of the divine, most perfect created thing, illuminating man.

"In the intelligible world God, surrounded by nine orders of angels, unmoved Himself, draws all to Himself ...

When Pico discusses the importance of biblical/Dionysian angelic assistance(which he finds in Iamblichus)he's not talking about angel magic.

according to pseudo-Dionysius, love makes the cosmos a unity [deliberate misunderstanding of Proclus?] http://bit.ly/fKNN9Z poetics of conv.

a principle Proclus set forth in comment on Alcibiades... thinking of planetary motion, but Dionysius transposed this language to angelology

Olivi's main drive was inspired by what he perceived as an abuse of Greek philosophy within theological issues http://bit.ly/dVy5Sa

"they discussed them as if they were some kind of gods, as one can clearly see from the book of Proclus and the Liber de causis"

such theological errors suffice to invalidate at once all endeavour to use pagan cosmology as a basis for angelological discussion

This notion of triads is something that Pseudo-Denys derives from Proclus but then expands.

Aquinas debt to Dionysius - divine attributes, angelology http://bit.ly/fkqw4D

philosophical program led Aquinas to fnt.of Arabian angelology for an extensive study+criticism of Proclus, pseudo-Dionysius+Liber De Causis

Corbin: "the complicity between angelology and cosmology" that was to be decisive

Copenhaver overstates case when he says Pico "professes" magic

http://www.scribd.com/doc/22387891/Corbin-Suhrawardi-s-Angelology-by-Roberts-Avens

@EPButler so in late neoplatonism angels aren't all part of the same universal "celestial hierarchy" but proper to separate hier's of henads


Bradshaw on Proclus, Elements of Theology http://bit.ly/fNGl0O in Aristotle East and West

Rappe 168: Proclus sets out to enumerate the successive orders of gods along the axis of the Parmenidean ontology

schools of Syrianus+Proclus in City and School http://bit.ly/gvSUj1

relative importance of Orpheus versus the oracles for the exposition of Platonic theology was under dispute during Proclus' days at Academy

while Syrianus deemed Aristotle study indispensable to Platonists, rated Plato above him+denied to Aristotle true understanding of theology

the final impetus that Proclus gave Syrianus's theology consisted in confronting it systematically with the Chaldaean Oracles

Syrianus could have considered Aristotle inventor of theology... undoubtedly true that Syrianus calls the Metaphysics a theological treatise

The author of De Causis drastically reduced Proclus' complex hierarchy,

Goodrich-Clarke: Syrianus wrote a “symphony” of Orpheus, Pythagoras, and Plato with reference to the Oracles.

Rappe on neoplatonic "divine hierarchy" http://bit.ly/hsSSWW Proclus relied on Syrianus for the enumeration of this divine hierarchy

Finamore Syrianus and Proclus accepted Iamblichus' metaphysical hierarchy and his emphasis on theurgy almost without question.same 4 vehicle

restructured type of intelligible hierarchy associated with lamblichus

O'Meara: now we know that it is Syrianus who, in his interpretation of the first and second hypotheses of the Parmenides,

invented the doctrine of the divine henads as the first degree in the hierarchy of the gods below the One, True God.

A.H. Armstrong on The Divine Mind in Plotinus http://bit.ly/gQUcqF

It seems likely that Syrianus is basing his interpretation on Iamblichean principles.

Syrianus' revolutionary interpretation of the second hypothesis [of Parmenides] as a theogony http://bit.ly/gGAXP4

Syrianus' defence of the ontological status of limits

for myth group: compare Pico's revival of neoplatonic allegory to decode Scripture with PKD revival of gnostic/hermetic allegory to read PKD

Pico vs. Ficino / many profitable contrasts: different takes on magic, Proclus, Plotinus, Aquinas, absent angel, absent Kabbalah, talismans

This Intelligible Living Being and this demiurge are both situated at a relatively low degree in the hierarchy of beings.

Wear p.59 Despite Dionysius' use of scriptural exegesis to manipulate the names of angels
...to his own categories of beings in the celestial hierarchy, his system is plainly based closely on that of Syrianus and Proclus

Angel in Iamblichus

Book V. CHAP. XXV.

If, therefore, these things were human customs alone, and derived their authority through our legal institutions, it might be said that the worship of the Gods was the invention of our conceptions. Now, however, divinity is the leader of it, who is thus invoked by sacrifices, and who is surrounded by a numerous multitude of Gods and angels. Under him, likewise, a certain common presiding power, is allotted dominion according to each nation of the earth. And a peculiar presiding power is allotted to each temple. Of the sacrifices, also, which are performed to the Gods, the inspective guardian is a God; but an angel, of those which are performed to angels; and a daemon, of such as are performed to daemons. After the same manner, also, in other sacred operations, the presiding power is allotted dominion over each, in a way allied to his proper genus. When, therefore, we offer sacrifices to the Gods, accompanied by the presiding Gods, who give completion to sacred operations, then at the same time, it is necessary in sacrifices to venerate the sacred law of divine sanctity; and at the same time, also, we ought to be confident, as sacrificing under the Gods who are the rulers of such works. We ought, likewise, to be very cautious, lest we should offer any gift unworthy of, or foreign from, the Gods. And, as the last admonition, we should in a manner entirely perfect, pay attention to all that surrounds us, and to the Gods, angels, and daemons that are distributed according to genera in the universe. And to all these, in a similar manner, an acceptable sacrifice should be offered; for thus alone sanctity can be preserved in a way worthy of the Gods who preside over it.

[elsewhere...]

THE DIVINITIES PRESENT AT THE RITES

Another controversy now awaits us, not less in significance than the one which has just been finished. Thou introducest it at once in regard to the divinities that are the causative powers in the art of divination, by questioning "whether a god or angel or demon, or some other such being, is present at the manifestations (epiphanies) or at the divinations or at any of the Sacred Performances."

The simple reply which we make to this is that it is not possible for the Divine Performances to be carried on in a manner befitting sacred matters without some one of the superior races being present, beholding and making the Sacred Performances complete.