The Philosopher Who Tried to End the World with a Book | John Scotus Eriugena’s Periphyseon
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ก.ค. 2024
- In the ninth century, a Christian mystical philosopher tried to end the world (as we know it), with a book. The Philosopher: John Scotus Eriugena, the Book: Periphyseon, On the Division of Nature. Exploring Eriugena's philosophical system and the deifying implications it holds for us humans, soon to be, and always have been, Gods.
00:00 Welcome and Cameo
00:43 Key Facts
02:37 Philosophical Influences
03:40 Philosophical System
06:54 Scotus’ Innovation
08:21 Creation as Theophany
12:43 Dialectical Pantheism
14:23 Fall and Return of All Things
15:31 Theosis, Deification - Heaven and Hell
19:35 Uniting Worlds
22:33 Condemnation
24:16 Influence and Study
25:07 Conclusion
#Eriugena #Scotus #Pantheism
Join us:
facebook: / seekersofunity
instagram: / seekersofunity
twitter: / seekersofu
website: www.seekersofunity.com
Thank you to our beloved Patrons: Miguel, Rodney, Adam, Alexandra, Curly Joe, Chelsea, Jonathan, Charley and Alex.
Join them in Supporting us:
patreon: / seekers
donate: paypal.com/paypalme/seekersofu
Sources and Further Reading:
plato.stanford.edu/entries/sc...
Bett, Henry, 1925, Johannes Scotus Erigena: A Study in Medieval Philosophy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Carabine, Deirdre, 2000, John Scottus Eriugena, (Great Medieval Thinkers), Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
Duclow, Don, 2006, Masters of Learned Ignorance, Eriugena, Eckhart, Cusanus, Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
Gavin, John, 2014, A Celtic Christology, Eugene, OR: Wipf&Stock
Gersh, Stephen, 1978, From Iamblichus to Eriugena: An Investigation of the Prehistory and Evolution of the Pseudo-Dionysian Tradition, Leiden: Brill.
Gersh, Stephen and Dermot Moran (eds.), 2006, Eriugena, Berkeley, and the Idealist Tradition, Notre Dame, IN: Notre Dame University Press
McEvoy, James and Dunne, Michael (eds.), 2002, History and Eschatology in John Scottus Eriugena and His Time, Leuven University Press.
McGinn, Bernard and Willemien Otten (eds.), 1994, Eriugena. East and West, Notre Dame, Notre Dame University Press.
Moran, Dermot, 1989, The Philosophy of John Scottus Eriugena. A Study of Idealism in the Middle Ages, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
---, 1990, “Pantheism from John Scottus Eriugena to Nicholas of Cusa”, American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly, 64(1): 131-152.
---, 1992b, “Origen and Eriugena: Aspects of Christian Gnosis”, in The Relationship Between Neoplatonism and Christianity, Thomas Finan and Vincent Twomey (eds), Dublin: Four Courts Press.
---, 1999, “Idealism in Medieval Philosophy: The Case of Johannes Scottus Eriugena”, Medieval Philosophy and Theology, 8(1): 53-82
O’Meara, John J., 1969, Eriugena, Cork: Mercier Press.
---, 1988, Eriugena, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Otten, Willemien, 1991, The Anthropology of Johannes Scottus Eriugena, Leiden: Brill.
Otten, Willemien and Ludwig Bieler (eds.), 1973, The Mind of Eriugena, Dublin: Irish University Press.
Otten, Willemien and Michael Allen (eds.), 2014, Eriugena and Creation, Turnhout: Brepols.
Sheldon-Williams, I.-P., 1970, “The Greek Platonist Tradition from the Cappadocians to Maximus and Eriugena”, in The Cambridge History of Later Greek and Early Medieval Thought, A.H. Armstrong (ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 421-534.
Siewers, Alfred, 2014, Re-imagining Nature: Environmental Humanities and Ecosemiotics, Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell University Press.
Stock, Brian, 1967, The Philosophical Anthropology of Johannes Scotus Eriugena, Studi Medievali, Ser. 3 (8): 1-57.
Video credit:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5wiS...
Papal Audience about John Scotus Erigena, June
Hey Seekers. Last week we asked who the mystery pantheist was. You guessed: Hermes Trismegistus, Maimonides, Moshe De Leon, Ficino, Pico della Mirandola, Giordano Bruno, Spinoza, Beethoven, Alan Moore. (Several of you weren’t paying attention to the clue we gave, that he was from the Middle Ages;) Only one person guessed correctly which was Dr Justin Sledge @Esoterica, well done. He even got the book, what a pro, and so effortlessly.
Question for next week’s vid: Who’s our next mystery Pantheist? Here are the clues, read carefully ;) He lived a life of much wandering, he got into some hot trouble with the Catholic church, he has been called one of the least understood figures of early modern Europe, a man with infinite knowledge and a great memory, who thought deeply about the very large and the very small.
Paracelsus?
Nope
I like the fact you haven't given the answer and lol am gona stop trying😂
Giordano Bruno, surely?
@Kevin Cobb thankyou for mentioning alan moore I live in the u.k and haven't heard about him power of Internet lol and jus goes to show how little we know as we know more thankyou
When you're thinking about a philosopher and your friend's episode comes up first is just the best feels.
You give me that pleasure often 😉😘
If he had a lived a little later, Scotus could have had some fertile discussions with Ibn Arabi and Meister Eckhart. Of course, in the timeless realm, those discussions are taking place as we speak.
A clear and rational philosophy class, but at the same time profound and spiritual. You have chosen a very important philosopher, but who has little material on him. Thanks!
Thank you Viviane 🙏🏼
A fantastic 20+ minutes. Very beneficial and much appreciated. As an Irish person I loved seeing the old 5 pound note!!
Thank you Karen for the kind feedback. It means a lot to us. We hope you enjoy the rest of our content.
This is an incredibly precise, knowledgeable and exciting explanation, delivered by an incredibly likeable person. Many thanks for your work!
You’re most welcome. Thank you Tim 🙏🏼
Thank you for your very concise and nicely presented talk on my fellow countryman John Scotus Eriugena.
I had the pleasure of strolling in his fine company while writing my work: Hearing in the Write.
Keep up the great work: making the world a brighter place.
Thank you Richard 🙏🏼 it’s a pleasure
I love your presentation! I am reading Eriugena at present, and waiting on an edition of volumes 3- 5 to come to UK so I can continue my studies. Please keep going! We need more.
Thank you Caitlin. So glad you liked it. Hope you keep enjoying our philosophical content.
Beautiful. Thanks so much for this.
Thank you Edith ☺️
Thank you to talk about this ..The Periphyseon or of the division of the nature is one of the best book I ever read. Also Syrianus 6e century, Master Eckart . Plotinus : the Enneads all neo platonicist are very instructive….
You're most welcome. Thanks for joining us.
Excellent one. There is not enough work on this guy out there. And now I understand him much better. Thank you for making it!
Glad i could help :)
exquisite!! thank you beloved brother!
Thank you Richard.
A fine piece of work! Thank you
Thank you Renato.
amazing video!!
this is seriously one of the best channel on youtube
keep seeking!
Thank you Nihil ☺️🙏🏼
Thank you for a most illuminating lecture! A Jungian projection hypothesis: neo-platonism should only be a metaphor for the hierophany of Self-Worth we can find within a ritualized or transfigured imagination. Instead of projecting what is divine to a non-dual reality, Freurebachian materialism allows us to achieve a sense of JSE's idea of reunification by contemplating the cultivation of godliness in suffering for the sake of Self-Worth. For the Cynic in me: 'Heracles' means 'the glory of Hera', who caused his suffering but not his self-worth. Much love!
You’re most welcome my friend.
Great video--clear, stimulating and precise. Thanks.
Glad it was helpful 🙏🏼
This helped me a lot thank you for such well made video !!!
You’re most welcome Tomas. Glad I could be of assistance. Thank you.
Really good.
🙏🏼
Appreciate the information. His teachings resonate with me. I'm gonna do further research. All in all. Great work. Namaste.
Thank you so much Atumm. So glad this was helpful and inspired further research 🙏🏼 Peace
Best channel ever
Great video. My thanks.
Thank you Jason. You’re most welcome.
In Lurianic kabbalah a distinction is made between the Ein Sof (the Infinite-God) and the Ohr Ein Sof (the light revelation of the Infinite).The Tzmitzum (contraction,concealment) allowing enabling Creation to manifest occurred in the Ohr Ein Sof alone.
Brilliant...thank you.
You're most welcome. Thank you Ramya.
Sounds like he had a very similar view of heaven and hell as myself.
"Heaven and hell aren't literal places in the afterlife but rather opposite states of being in the material or present life. Heaven being the presence of God and hell the separation. The separation from God is not absolute, however, God lives within all of creation, but due to an individual's ignorance of the divinity within. It is a perceived separation but that perception is all that matters to the mind and body in the present. The difference between these two states of being are like night and day. Once the divinity within is known in it's truth and relation to the universe, night is transformed into day and the world is illuminated by the light of God. What was once hell becomes heaven."
This was so beautiful said and again nailed it imho. Thank you Justin.
1. Isnt he not often considered a panentheist instead of a full blown pantheist
2. He was at the court of Charles the bold the grandson of Charlemagne
Thank you for the corrections 🙏🏼
Indeed.Wonder and Believe.
Very good video. Eriugenas' On the Division of Nature is one of the most intelligent books I have ever read! He was a very logical, and reasonable thinker. In truth, there can be only one Ese that is a part of all things, i.e. the Agathon, the All, the One, or if you prefer "God". Simple to see how really religion and science are looking for the same thing, the answer that is provided by On The Division of Nature, a wonderful metaphysical work. #SeekWisdom
Thank you Andrew 🙏🏼
Thank you for the video. I am reading a book at the moment on Eriugena by Eoghan Mac Aogáin. I was born in Dublin and grew up there. I can imagine that Eriugena was a danger to the Catholic Church, seeing his interst in the Greek Church.
This channel provides some high level mystical philosophy explained in an accessible manner. Indeed, a truly needed source of wisdom with so much shallow new age nonsense propagating YT. Thank you!
Thank you Royal Flush. We aim to deliver on exact that.
I searched an introduction on J.S. Eriugena, and I found your comment the most informative. I strongly recommend you to study Dr. Walter Russell ("The secret of light" and "The Universal One"), and "Dao Dejing" (i.e. Tao Te Ching) by Laozi. Thank you!
Great Videos, the high school I went to was called Scotus. Later when I learned of Eriugena I hoped it was named after him but it was John Dun Scotus.
Thanks KP. Haha don’t worry, Dun Scotus was cool too 😋
Brilliant! More proof that the Irish Saved Civilization
Beautifully and eloquently presented.
I love the virual kiss in the end too. 😏🤗👌
Thank you Mihaela. That’s what it’s all about. Love 😘😊
TY.
..
🙏🏼
A great summary of JSE. I often think that there is something in JSE that might help to bring together some of the instincts of classical theism with process theology. Have you any thoughts on that? Great channel btw
Thank you Stuart. Yes, there's definitely a lot of "process" vibes in JSE. Definitely worth exploring. Glad you're enjoying it.
With love,
Zevi
Thanks. Have the Periphyseon waiting for me at least a couple of years. Worked my way through Eckhart, and it seems about time to move further back. When I take a look at the literature you offer, nothing really new has come out in the last years.
One of the reasons to condemn the church, is precisely that they condemned thinkers like Eckhart and Eriugena.
I don't mind a two hour talk, could go on listening a whole day and night.
Glad you enjoyed Henri. Thank you.
Does Eriugena refer to God as a her?
Do you have a video about James Joyce?
We don’t. But we should.
316th to like! Thank you so much for the mereological exposition of JSE! I studied formal mereology on the nature of personal change, which like any account of 4d vagueness, i.e., Theseus's Ship, i found impossible to mathematize in any way but as plurality-- no ontological unit. So if humanity is the microcosm, i'm not seeing a pantheism but a polytheism. But maybe a Pythagorean assumption about the mathematical nature of reality is wrong-headed? But then an emanation metaphysics does not really work without the math, eh? Is this a destructive dilemma? Time will tell, i guess. Much love!
Zohar "There is no place devoid of Him"
Gorgeous!
I wonder if the Watchowski's read him...
🤔
John Scotus Eriugena -- definitely what i believe... definitely. I heard nothing that I didn't recognize. I need to read the man. I've heard his name - really, read of him, I think. My knowledge is so scattered.( a puzzle without all the pieces) ... but I never heard a clear explanation. Thank you!
You’re most welcome. Ya, he’s really got it all
@@SeekersofUnity That is it -- in one sentence he says it. How didn't they burn him at the stake like dear old Giordano? (actually young, when he died!)That is so very against the dreck they teach. I've read so much in my life searching for understanding of what I was experiencing.
Would it be true to say that the Christian Church found Scotus's teaching too difficult to implement and therefore/because of not allowing the Church to institutionalise God's being? Thank you for the video, I can see your wonder for Scotus's teachings.
First time viewer. First time being introduced to John Scotus Eriugina. I will be peeling the onion back more, but for what I just listened to this man was an absolute genius and I can't imagine how difficult it was for him to communicate what he could envision. I think I can help him prove his point with 2 science experiments and the description that the bible uses to portray "God".
Genesis states that in the beginning there was only darkness and everything was void of form. In the beginning was the word and the word was God. It says that God molded and shaped reality into being. After the world was formed God said let there be light. According to this description, "God" is frequencies. Nothing was made that wasn't made by God. God created all things seen and unseen.
The 2 experiments that show exactly that is the amazing resonance experiment and star in a jar.
You cannot separate this energy from anything in existence. This energy is infinitely expressing itself throughout the universe. You are made of that energy and by definition are that energy and also utilize that same process while interacting with other expressions.
14:23 Prodigal Son for Metaphysics.
Does Scotus prefigure Whitehead? The close identification with God and a continually unfolding 'creativity' are strongly suggestive of that. Was God for Scotus (or Whitehead for that matter) to be imagined as unchanging?
Thanks for this talk. Very illuminating.
That is certainly a fascinating comparison to make. I would want to look for references to Bruno in Whiteheads work. Whitehead seems to have been influenced my philosophical mysticism is general, even if not Bruno in specific. I hope we get to making a video on Whitehead to explore all of that. Thank you 🙏🏼
First of all, wow. Second of all, tomorrow I'm presenting this theme in class, I had thought of referring to God as "she" so when I heard you say it, my jaw dropped. Thank you so much for teaching in this very interesting and easy-to-follow way. Regards from Spain!
Thank you Alek for that kind feedback. It’s really appreciated. God is certainly beyond gender but it helps to restore the balance a little with some unexpected use of language. You’re most welcome and i hope your presentation goes well. Love from Israel 😘
@@SeekersofUnity precisely!!! thank you so much for the kind response, have a beautiful day
11:59pm : God has no atributes
12:00am : God is a woman
@@SeekersofUnity this is stupid. When we call God "he" we just follow precedence without atributing biological masculinity. But when you call God "she" you reduce God to piece of feminist propaganda.
The Philosophy of John Scotus reminds me of eastern Christian theology rather than western, Catholic theology 😅. His categories of Nature leads eventually to the Uncreated-created nature distinction of the Eastern holy fathers.
You did an excellent job in presenting the work of Scotus but I think it is wrong to dub the theology of Scotus as a form of "pantheism" since he makes a sharp and clear distinction between Man and God and nature which is created and the divine Nature which is Uncreated. I would say the term "Pan-Entheism" is more appropriate.
I would be very interested to know the views of Scotus on the problem of evil.
It's not by chance that his thought reminds you of the Christian East. Scotus drinks deeps from the East Fathers, and openly so. A large part of his project may be seen as an attempt to re-unite the thinking of the Christian East and West.
Thank you. You may be right in saying that Scotus can more accurately be labeled a Panentheist. Until now i've been discussing both pantheists and panentheists under the banner of pantheism. But i hope to open up that nuance when we address panenthism head on.
Scotus' view on the problem of evil is classically Neoplatonic, where he sees evil, not as created, or as having any intrinsic exitance, but as mere privation of being. There's been a tremendous amount written on this conception of evil. Here's good old wiki to start: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absence_of_good
Thank you for watching and for your thoughtful feedback,
Zevi
@@SeekersofUnity I appreciate that you took the time to write down a detailed answer. I had a feeling that Scotus would view Evil as Privatio Boni. I am looking forward for your next videos. Good luck!
My pleasure. Thank you.
Zevi, I
This is a misreading of Eriugena in multiple ways. Where to begin?
1) Emanationism does not entail pantheism. Eriugena sees exitus as what was God becoming what is not God, as matter becomes energy in an atomic explosion and is no longer matter.
2) Eriugena is a panentheist in the Pauline sense: in God all things "live, move, and have our being," but his apophasis makes the transcendence of God just as radical as God's immanence.
3) Eriugena is not a monist. For him plurality is not illusory or temporary. He complains in the Periphyseon about Christians so ignorant that they do not even know the Trinity or the two natures in Christ. His clear understanding is that Trinity and Incarnation (Nicea and Chalcedon) are the most elementary truths of Christian doctrine. In these two councils the fathers articulated what can be called an ontology of distinction without separation. This plays out further in Eriugena's eschatology. Neither the blessed nor the damned are annihilated or absorbed into God. The damned persist in torment, alienated from God relationally, but still existing. The blessed never attain henosis in the Neoplatonic sense, but rather eternally discover God in an endless succession of finite theophanies (an idea Eriugena got from Gregory of Nyssa).
4) Eriugena does not conceive of Hell as absence from God, but rather as God's radical presence and glory as experienced by the rebellious soul. This only sharpens the point that his eschatology is not monistic but perichoretic--even the damned are radically present to God, but alienated by their rebellion.
5) Periphyseon V presents us with several analogies whereby Eriugena makes it plain that plurality is a divinely ordained and unending reality (a room full of many lamps, the golden ball on a spire, etc.).
6) The final reditus is not a return to the initial oneness. The end is different from the beginning in that the plurality and distinction of all things is the eternal consummation of what Eriugena calls "God's art." God does not merely exist--he creates and self-explicates in the artifacts of divine creation. All creatures are theophanies in that they bear God's design and reveal something about God, as all art reveals the artist. The final reditus is not a reabsorption into God but a setting of each and every created thing into its proper and divinely ordained context, thus revealing each and all as the theophanies they are. (The bitter irony is that even the rebellious soul bears witness to God's glory--it cannot do otherwise--and experiences the futility of its resistance for all eternity. This is how Eriugena envisions Hell.)
Without recognizing the centrality of Nicene and Chalcedonian categories in Eriugena's thought, it is impossible to properly grasp his ontology. I would say that the mistake is excusable, but Eriugena's chief sources (other than the pseudo-Dionysius) were Gregory of Nyssa, Augustine, and Maximus. Augustine and Gregory were, of course, two of the most important Trinitarian formularies, while Maximus was the chief defender of Chalcedonian orthodoxy against the monotheletes. Eriugena's philosophy is founded on the ontology entailed by his doctrinal commitments. His apophasis is merely the method and vocabulary within which he works out his views--his doctrinal commitments are the premises from which his whole system proceeds.
Thank you Carey for your insightful and critical feedback. It’s most appreciated.
@SeekersofUnity If I might recommend two books on Eriugena, Dierdre Carabine's "John Scottus Eriugena" and John J. O'Meara's "Eriugena" are both excellent expositions of his thought.
🙏🏼
The numerous found in 1.
Based
As opposed to Debased?
So he was a pantheist and precursor to Spinoza. G-d and Nature are one.
In Judaism, God existing before the act of creation logically can not be considered identical with the creation itself as proposed in pantheistic belief
What does that actually mean?🤔
I'd say that he was a panentheist rather than a straight pantheist as he clearly believes that God is both immanent and transcendent.The return to God,as God, wouldn't be well regarded by the church at the time or now for that matter reading the Catholic Encyclopedia's article on him.As to the surname,the Scotti where and Irish tribe who took over Scotland where their name lives on.
Happened in Islam, this kind of debate how to proof God existence, probably will be persecuted with people who practice Religion in the terms of literal materialism view, i dont what it's called, Ortodhox Muslim.....?
It's not in the terms pantheism, it's not right, God Is One, yet His presence is anywhere and everywhere, surpasses Time, Matters, Dimensions, even if we interpreted dimensions this day it's always in terms of matter or place, no, it's one metaphysical terms, not exactly energy like those scientist said, but more on spiritual view.....
Sometimes i trapped while defining spiritual, a dichotomy between matters and mentaphisical thing, well actually it's not.....
That's why there's a spiritual practice we have to do, as that is the way to witness the God, not just empty dogma those preacher talk about, witnessing God right before our own eyes, with our soul witnessing God presence.....
I hate empty dogma preached by scholars, i mean many scholars always hating people who not practicing what we believe, it5wrong on so many level, it makes people and society going mad, persecute people who labelled herecy, and even using those holy scriptures to justify scapegoating labelling....
Worshipping God it's not like that, altough it was right that people who criminal and sadistic behaviour is beyond forgiveness.....
Daoism anyone?
Mestre dos Magos?
Yes, i have witnesssed hell just like you define here....
😢
Eriugena was not a pantheist. Theism was always his priority. he sounds pantheistic at times due to the neo platonic background he was thinking in and synthesizers tend to sound that way. If you considered trinitarian theology I think you'd understand the point clearer.
I find it silly that you call God "she" when you are talking about a religious framework where God is not female. Whats the point of talking about other religions when you then impose your own religious categories onto them in the process? Either talk about it completely from your own perspective or give a neutral presentation. But something in between comes across as kinda subversive.
Perhaps we intend to subvert.
@@SeekersofUnity do you?
Some days.
6:20 not as radical or innovative perhaps as seen from their perspective. Remember that the gnostic, and neoplatonist current was strong or originated in Egypt, along with the earliest rise of Christianity from which Latin speaking interpolators tried to understand their intellectual roots. The word for divinity in Egyptian is neter. NETER, NATUR, Natura, nature. Nature as God and as something we are within, would be a natural association. Etymology be damned.
Why do you even call God "her"? Is it because Scotus did it, or is it your own special thing?
Just my own corrective. My apologies if it’s unappreciated.
@@SeekersofUnity Feminization of God is a heresy already condemned by an orthodox church synod, with which Roman Catholics and faithful Protestants would certainly agree. That is called SOPHIAN HERESY, invented by Bulgakov, Solovyov and Florensky, but certainly carried on by feminists. The Lord is not male but certainly also not female.
Why "She" rather than "They"? "And God said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness," Genesis 1:26. "They" is perfectly functional as a gender neutral pronoun in English or as mystical plural of something beyond gender, duplication, or singularness.
Ever the subversive
Mr Eriugene should have just read the Upanishads.
:30 satan.
Pandeism