[Discussion] On the Gods and the World, Ch. VI

[sdi]

Good morning, and a sunny Wednesday to you all! Now we're really getting into the meat of it, so let's pick the puzzle-box back up, shall we?

VI. On Gods Cosmic and Hypercosmic.

Of the Gods some are of the world, Cosmic,* and some above the world, Hypercosmic. By the Cosmic I mean those who make the Cosmos. Of the Hypercosmic Gods some create Essence, some Mind, and some Soul.† Thus they have three orders; all of which may be found in treatises on the subject.

Of the Cosmic Gods some make the World be, others animate it, others harmonize it, consisting as it does of different elements; the fourth class keep it when harmonized.

These are four actions, each of which has a beginning, middle, and end, consequently there must be twelve gods governing the world.

Those who make the world are Zeus, Poseidon, and Hephaistos; those who animate it are Demeter, Hera, and Artemis; those who harmonize it are Apollo, Aphrodite, and Hermes; those who watch over it are Hestia, Athena, and Ares.‡§

One can see secret suggestions of this in their images. Apollo tunes a lyre; Athena is armed; Aphrodite is naked (because harmony creates beauty, and beauty in things seen is not covered).

While these twelve in the primary sense possess the world, we should consider that the other gods are contained in these. Dionysus in Zeus, for instance, Asklepios in Apollo, the Charites in Aphrodite.

We can also discern their various spheres: to Hestia belongs the Earth, to Poseidon water, to Hera air, to Hephaistos fire. And the six superior spheres to the gods to whom they are usually attributed. For Apollo and Artemis are to be taken for the Sun and Moon, the sphere of Kronos should be attributed to Demeter, the ether to Athena, while the heaven is common to all. Thus the orders, powers, and spheres of the Twelve Gods have been explained and celebrated in hymns.

* Gilbert Murray notes, "I translate κόσμος ['cosmos'] generally as 'World,' sometimes as 'Cosmos.' It always has the connotation of 'divine order.'"

† Arthur Darby Nock translates this line differently: "Of the supramundane some make the essences of the gods, some the intelligence, some the souls." (Emphasis mine.) That is, they don't just make Essence, Mind, and Soul generally, it is that the Hypercosmic Gods make the Cosmic Gods, which in turn go and make other things.

‡ Thomas Taylor notes, "Such of my English readers as are capable of ascending to a knowledge of the gods, through a regular course of philosophic discipline, may consult my translation of the Elements of Theology, by Proclus [p. 300], my Introduction to the Parmenides of Plato, and my Notes on the Cratylus, where the orders of the gods are more fully unfolded." I was unable to find a full online scan of Taylor's Cratylus, Phædo, Parmenides and Timæus of Plato, but it's still in print and easy to find.

§ Once again, here and below, Taylor uses the Roman deities: Jupiter, Neptune, Vulcan, Ceres, Juno, Diana, Mercury, Venus, Apollo, Vesta, Minerva (also Pallas), Mars, Bacchus, the Graces, and Saturn. Note that Taylor has swapped the order of Mercury and Apollo!

Comments

[sdi]

You know, I was just re-reading the next chapter of Sallustius in preparation for getting together next week's post, and came across this line: "Of the bodies in the Cosmos, some imitate Mind and move in orbits; some imitate Soul and move in a straight line, fire and air upward, earth and water downward."

Clearly there's some kind of tradition behind these analogies! I find Sallustius no less confusing here than Pseudo-Dionysius, though. Why does Mind go in circles? Why does Soul go in straight lines? What does either even refer to?

[barefootwisdom]

Why does Mind go in circles? Why does Soul go in straight lines? What does either even refer to?

For starters, circular motion is perfect (in the literal sense of "complete"): when a circle revolves about its center, there's nowhere that it goes to that it wasn't already, and nowhere that it used to be that it isn't anymore. In the Timaeus, Plato calls the circular motion of the heavens "the moving image of eternity"—where "image" is in the sense of an icon, a copy, etc.

Contrast that with rectilinear (straight-line) motion, which lacks that sort of perfection, always going from one thing to another.

Circular motion, therefore, is the middle term between the unmoving/unchanging (eternity, ever complete in itself), and that which changes in a way that involves incompleteness (rectilinear motion).

[boccaderlupo]

Exactly. Might be something for you folks who are taking up the Sacred Geometry.

As barefootwisdom mentioned, Timaeus includes several references to shapes and motions, including 33b, which has this line, discussing the Demiurge giving a spherical shape to the world:

This of all shapes is the most complete and most like itself, which he [the Demiurge] gave to it because he believed likeness is incalculably more excellent than unlikeness.

A bit of a digression, but that last bit ties back into a previous theme we've seen elsewhere.

Later on, discussing motion, in 89a:

Now the best of the motions is one that occurs within oneself and is caused by oneself. This is the motion that bears the greatest kinship to understanding and to the motion of the universe.

Using the Zeyl translation, FWIW.

[sdi]

Thank you both for this. But what does it mean for Mind or Soul to be moving? (I would have assumed that, as the animating process, Soul to be the thing that "gives rise" to motion, and so only things "below" or "contained within" it to be mobile.) Further, why is Mind considered to be more complete than Soul? (Are they not both Gods, and therefore both self-complete?)

(Maybe I'm getting ahead of myself and should simply dig into these next week, where they appear in the text itself...)


Might be something for you folks who are taking up the Sacred Geometry.

Ha! You know, I never considered sacred geometry to have anything to do with motion or change: it seemed to me to be representative of eternally static properties of numbers. Of course, one actually has to do the constructions... for some reason, I always considered that a metaprocess or epiphenomenon having nothing essential to do with the geometry itself. Maybe I've been a computer programmer for too long—we maintain very strict boundaries between "code" and "data" :)

[boccaderlupo]

For the record, I don't have any knowledge about Sacred Geometry, and my coding is strictly ad hoc, so take my comments for what they are worth!

[barefootwisdom]

You're most welcome. Regarding "motion": the Greek philosophers' use of "motion" is much more broad than our modern English term; for the Greeks, motion includes change of all kinds. "Local motion," or change of place/location, is only one kind of motion, and generally speaking, one of the least interesting kinds, since it's pretty far down the metaphysical hierarchy.

Perhaps that's enough of a seed to prepare for next week. ;)

[sdi]

Thank you! Yes, that helps. In the material, it's circles and lines. In the astral, it's Luna and Mars. Presumably the higher process is Mind and Soul.