/lit/ - Literature

>>16368013
his mysticism is dead since late 17th century.

>>16368027
Why, did it suddenly stop being true?

>>16368032
I doesn't matter if it's true or not, come on.
People just stopped reading and talking about him. I don't remember the context of this turn, but it was something to the effect of the last mystics of his making dying without intellectual heirs. It happens a lot in history.

>>16368053
It's because some guy proved he was a forgery and not really The Areopagite.
But maximus the confessor draws heavily from him, and he's in the top 5 most influ church fathers in both orthodoxy and catholicism.

>>16368053
I presume it was related to the quietist controversy

It happens every few centuries, I hope we're due for a revival in the current era

>>16368064
>forgery

He wrote pseudonymously, which was reasonably common in antiquity. Even if he had signed it Mickey Mouse it doesn't really matter, the ideas stand on their own merit

>>16368013
The divine names is great work. People interested in theology need to read it. Especially as an intro to something like negative theology

I really want to read Hugh de Balma's Viae Syon Lugent, I think pic related might have it, it's a really great book series

>>16368066
>I presume it was related to the quietist controversy
Yes! It was it indeed.

>>16368089
Negated the pic

>>16368092
Every so often this flairs up

You had the same thing a few centuries earlier with various mystics (especially beguines/beghards, though what these terms referred to changed around a lot) getting condemned for ideas that were essentially the same as what St. John and St. Teresa put out later

>>16368070
The Problem is everyone from maximus the confessor to aquinas to the whole church and whoever else is a church doctor up to the 19th century, believed he was genuinely the original Areopagite and treated him as next to scripture.
This is how Neoplatonism is so entrenched in Christianity theology. I even think the orthodox church still haven't denounced him as pseudepigrapha.

I believe he wasn't even Christian.

>>16368141
Why do you believe that?

>>16368151
https://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/comments/4zttth/this_article_argues_that_pseudodionysius_the/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

>>16368070
No, that's not how Christianity works. The "merit" of an idea is meaningless.

>>16368013
Because nobody actually reads here.

>>16368151
Nevermind broken link for me.
https://www.academia.edu/5836660/Pseudo_Dionysius_and_Damascius_an_impossible_identification

>>16368202
And this was also the wrong link. Sorry am on my phone, but I guess this suffices.

>>16368141
>This is how Neoplatonism is so entrenched in Christianity theology
how? not because platonism and christianity agree on many issues and there were christians trying to reconcile both and pagan platonists doing the same attempt at reconciliation?

>>16368013
I am very interested in reading Pseudo-Dionysus, but I don’t want to wait until I have read all of Plato and the Enneads first, although I will certainly be reading these later works at some point. I am decently well read in eastern philosophy and have a working knowledge of the basic ideas of most western philosophers, can I just pick up Pseudo-Dionysus and understand his work as a self-contained system or doctrine, or if I have not read Plato will there be a lot of stuff I might miss out on and not understand?

>>16368271
Start with the Greeks
Plato specifically here

>>16368089
Yep, just checked my copy

>>16368261
I literally said how.
Christianity and Platonism was in debates for half a millennia, and the appeal of Platonism was pretty much felt by every single big church father every century became more and more platonic, but in comes the Areopagite implying "neo"platonic ideas have been Christian Doctrine all along! And everyone took the bait, probably because every intelligent person subconsciously wants to be a Platonist. Especially Maximus the Confessor. Orthodox/Catholic Christianity is watered-down Neoplatonism.
Within the same three years that the Platonic Academy in Athens was banned the Dionysian Corpus was first cited/published. Likely written on the journey from Greece to Persia by the six exiled philosophers (who were quite infamous—which is why the were banned, it is theorized that Damascius had begun reversing the decline of "paganism" in Athens). Pic related covers all the parallels.

>>16368271
Dionysius employs a lot of platonic metaphysical conceptions and on the biblical symbolique drawing an interesting parallel. Just like Proclus, on the platonic side, Gregory of Nyssa, on the christian one, was a huge influence. I don't see any problem with tackling it without a solid background in platonism and christian theology and the bible insofar as you have a metaphysical sensibility.

>>16368326
>Orthodox/Catholic Christianity is watered-down Neoplatonism.
Bullshit.

>>16368271
As implied here
>>16368326
He is intentionally written as if he was the source of both Christianity and Neoplatonism, such that he contains all platonic thought and theory simplified.

>>16368013
I tried to read him when I heard that he was a possible influence for St. John of the Cross, but I found it to be very difficult to get through. I literally discovered Pseudo-Dionysius last night though so maybe I should re-read when I'm less tired.

>>16368188
It literally is how it works, it's a theological work based on an authors thoughts about the nature of God, the orthodoxy of the ideas is judged by whether or not they make sense in the light of what we judge to be true about the nature of God

>>16368171
>haha, if we sneakily give the Christians ideas that are not only trinitarian but completely compatible with orthodoxy then we'll keep paganism alive

What brainlet came up with this

>>16368313
Based, will have to get hold of one

>>16368326
>Christianity and Platonism was in debates for half a millennia, and the appeal of Platonism was pretty much felt by every single big church father every century became more and more platonic.
Can you suspend you bias for a minute? No, there was no debate between Platonism and Christianity. Christianity had to secure its theology and ecclesiastical coherence against the hundreds of christian gnostic sects. Platonism was seen as an ally in what it had profound doctrinal similarities, Plotinus engaged against specific gnostic sects too.

>the Areopagite implying "neo"platonic ideas have been Christian Doctrine all along! And everyone took the bait, probably because every intelligent person subconsciously wants to be a Platonist
How can you be a platonist and be so dishonest and biased like this? I am a christian heretic because of platonism but seeing someone like you standing for blatant lies is repulsive and anti-platonic in what it considers virtuous, not less repulsive as priests condemning everything foreign to christianity as incompatible and demonic.
As I said and you ignored obviously, Ammonius Saccas tried to reconcile both paganism and platonism with christianity, Origen before Dionysius was already engaging with both in a single corpus, Philo and Clement of Alexandria, Justin the Martyr (these preceeding most ''neo''platonists), Nyssa likewise, because there were already many similar conceptions in the New Testament and in gnostic jewish sects that influenced heavily christianity through Paul and other figures of the NT. You know nothing about Christianity.

>>16368326
>Orthodox/Catholic Christianity is watered-down Neoplatonism.
You have never opened a single theological work. Most orthodox and catholic theologians accept what is true in platonism but correct what is wrong, specially Maximus utterly btfoing the platonic ideas in Origen.

>>16368361
Except it's a theological work thought to have been written by a student of fucking Paul. There are literally ideas in that the church fathers have wanted to adopt but struggled to justify, until he came along like a blessing to their incompatible intuitions about the truth. He opened the gates of the imagination to embrace Platonism completely, the only difference being some historical tidbits and less complexity.

>>16368371
They're only compatible with orthodoxy thanks to him through Maximus the Confessor.
Nyssa is an iffy church father and borderline heretic, if not for Dionysius and Maximus there'd be even more of what he said that wouldn't be acceptable (like his belief in universal restoration that Maximus changed into a more digestible version).

>>16368397
If only there was some way of arguing against ideas if they're actually incompatible

>>16368397
>Less complexity
What does this even mean?
You keep saying that it's watered down but that's horseshit

>>16368330
ok thanks

>>16368397
>He opened the gates of the imagination to embrace Platonism completely, the only difference being some historical tidbits and less complexity.
No. Stop spreading lies. There was already an accepted correspondence between platonism and christianity. Dionysius was seen as a paragon because all there is in his works is compatible with christian doctrine, differently from Origen who incorporated platonic ideas foreign to christianity.

>>16368388
> but correct what is wrong
not him but what is wrong in Platonism?

Unironically what is heretical about universal restoration?

All creation came forth from the First Cause, surely it would also go back to Him at the end of time.

>>16368522
Platonism is not homogeneous, but what is of platonic origin, hold by some platonists, that the world is eternal, that the logoi, or forms, are purely ideas and not also will(ed), impersonality of the En, that there was no change from nonexistence to existence but a continuity of being and becoming.

>>16368561
>Unironically what is heretical about universal restoration?

Theologically speaking, this hasn't been revealed to us. It can only be hoped for. Secondly, promulgating the notion risks discouraging men from pursuing their salvation.

>>16368605
>that the logoi, or forms, are purely ideas and not also will(ed), impersonality of the En

>>16368463
What platonists keeps distinct Christianity's confuses into one, but I should admit that Alexandrian Neoplatonism was also watered down, like Ammonius' or Olympiodorus' monotheism.

>>16368561
As I said with Maximus, he made it pseudo-doctrine, in that in the eschaton all creation is made divine through the energies of God by participation in Christ. It is then our own free disposition that makes this experience a living hell or the ultimate bliss, aka the semi-pelagianism of Augustine. This is orthodoxy, that gehenna and god's love/grace are one and the same transfiguration light. So hell is a kind of "super cognitive-dissonance", you make yourself be "in hell". Thus, hypothetically, the toll houses/purgatory is the process of accepting God.

>>16368388
touché

>>16368378
>No, there was no debate between Platonism and Christianity.
Are you stupid? Platonism pretty much was THE pagan philosophy that Christians had to defeat in order to get hegemony. To defeat the polytheists they had to defeat Platonism, unfortunately for the Christians a lot of Platonism was just too good to give up so that the Christians pretty much had to absorb whatever they could of it while rejected that which outright contradicted the Bible.

In the end though i don't think Christians won the debates but instead won it by force through becoming more and more vicious. And it seems you as a "heretical" Christians knows this yourself.

>>16368657
An example being the change of the enneads
into merely being the hierarchy of angel and not of the logoi/forms. A difference in Christianity and Platonism is that the angels would be the thoughts of god made manifest as the hierarchy of being, instead the angels are created and pointless, mere ego-stroking beauties.

>>16368702
>Platonism pretty much was THE pagan philosophy that Christians had to defeat in order to get hegemony.
No, it wasn't. Platonism has always been a fringe intellectual group, even though it worked with a pagan framework it was not the theological stone of the religion of the roman state, but that of the ancient mysteries, which had nothing to do with the already decadent roman religion.

>To defeat polytheists they had to defeat Platonism
What a simplistic mind of yours. Platonism was not the support of the roman paganism as I said. The roman religion was much more exoteric and superficial so much so it ran in compliance with practical and social duties. It had no esoteric, purely intellectual foundation like Platonism and the mysteries were.

>unfortunately
There was no harsh conflict. As I said earlier in this thread there were christians studying under platonists, platonists son of christians. All theologians were educated in pagan philosophy and knew pagans (platonists) were right on some matters, why would it be unfortunate? Obviously there were discussions and conflicts among platonists and christians but these were not the main adversaries like institutional religion of rome, representing the most widespread practice of paganism and the christian gnostics.

>In the end though i don't think Christians won the debates but instead won it by force through becoming more and more vicious.
What debates are you referring to? Celsus? Porphyry? Christianity established itself because of something not even platonism had: Revelation.

>>16368865
>Platonism has always been a fringe intellectual group
opinion discarded, ALL the big name neoplatonists were active in politics/conversed with emperors, or fucking were emperors/governors/high officials themselves.
Shouldn't flaunt your pseudery in the open like that.
Christian examples are Ambrose and Synesius who only became Christians AFTER being elected bishops because they were so politically popular by the masses.

>>16369087
like why the fuck you think Justinian felt the need to banish a "fringe organization with no influence" who then moved to the fucking court of the Sassanid emperor.

>>16369107
Paganism was dead by the time of Justinian, Christianity was already established as the official religion and its predominance was evident. Justinian simply would not fund pagan intellectual circles, it was not a threat to Christianity (since as I told you there was pacific conviviality and intellectual engagement between platonists and christians). I'd like to remember also that it was not the original Academy, the original one was destroyed by a roman dictator.
In short, why the fuck did Justinian banish pagan circles? To establish homogeneity, wipe off pagan practices. Can you use your brain?

>>16368865
You truly are a liar and deceiver. There was constant tension between the polytheists(neoplatonists) and Christians. Christians only studied philosophy and Neoplatonism in order to justify their religion. They; as st Basil said, took from the heathen books what befit them and passed over the rest. There was no sort of peaceful coexistence between the two camps beyond that. The Christians that studied Neoplatonism went right ahead and advocated for the destruction of the religious institutions of the Neoplatonists.

The attacks on the philosophers, their temples and academies was not some historical opsie, it was preached by all your supposedly enlightened and bigbrained Christian church fathers.
>Christianity established itself because of something not even platonism had
A massive appeal to the slave classes and women.

>>16369283
>why the fuck did Justinian banish pagan circles
Because they were reversing christianization.
Again you flaunt your ignorance, there were still pagan "circles" in Byzantium up to the 9th century.

>>16369559
>polytheists (neoplatonists)
Do you really think all polytheists were ''neo''platonists (none ''neo''platonist considered himself a ''neo''platonist, but a platonist, this is a term coined by protestant scholars, why would you employ this term?) and that all platonists were polytheists and not, say, henotheists? Why would polytheists ignore and destroy polytheistic centers of study? Why would not polytheists employ and spread the most refined polytheistic works of theology? The problem with you people is that you have superficial knowledge about the things you think you know. Polytheism was never a homogeneous term. I have repeatedly told in this thread how roman pagans ignored platonism and metaphysics.

>Christians only studied philosophy and Neoplatonism in order to justify their religion
Retard. Platonism and even pagan teachings in general were not unanimously understood as compatible and acceptable within christian theology. There are many, perhaps even majority, theologians who employ no platonic idea, no suggestion of it in their theological works and their poetry. Christianity is justified in a single book: Bible. The foundation and center of theology is there. Aristotelianism and Platonism were supports in developing a rational exposition (as both those were) of christian theology.

>The Christians that studied Neoplatonism went right ahead and advocated for the destruction of the religious institutions of the Neoplatonists.
What religious institutions of the ''neo''platonists? Platonism never had a religious institution, they had intellectual centers, minor schools and none of these were religious institutions (you have no idea what a religious institution is, obviously). Will you tell me stoics, skeptics, atomists, sophists had religious institutions too?

>The attacks on the philosophers, their temples and academies was not some historical opsie.
What attacks on platonists? There has never been an attack against a platonist because he was a platonist. As I said it was very common for christians to study under platonist teachers, there were platonists sympathetic toward christianity (Ammonius Saccas, is the most famous one).

>Temples and Academies
Not platonic temples. They were temples from roman and other pagans. Let me tell you two things: Most temples during the last centuries of Roman empire were already abandoned; A roman dictator destroyed the original Platonic Academy.

>A massive appeal to the slave classes and women.
It appealed the most outstanding intellectuals of the time, but was not restricted to its intellectual side (theology) but as true religion is universalist.

You have no idea what you are talking about. You have no knowledge of Platonism and much less Christianity. History on late antiquity is recommended, go read a book.

>>16369087
Plotinus. Who else? Julian. Who else? No platonic doctrine was elevated as official pagan theology. Roman empire was intellectually decadent. Theology and intellectual endeavour was fringe in ancient rome. The point is it has never been the main adversary of christianity (even so because of all the reasons I pointed in this thread and you people ignore).

>>16369723
Yes, merely naming Plotinus is an understatement of the power of his political influence (his joining a 'royal expedition' to Persia is merely one proof, he had connections with the whole roman elite during Gallienus reign).
Iamblichus was of the Chaldean/Syrian elite and was a high ranking official in the area of Syria; his student Sopater the Syrian was also a high ranking 'politician' and friends with the schizophrenic midwit Constantine "the Great", and tried to save him from Christianity but was betrayed by some Arian bishop. In fact pretty much all of Iamblichus circle were elites.
Synesius, as I mentioned, was a "christian" neoplatonism, calling him christian after reading his works can only be said as a joke.
Salustius (not Sallust).
Themistius, he rivaled the powers of the emperorS in influence.
Proclus was regularly asked by the peoples of Athens to be a bipartisan negotiator in times of conflict, one time he was exiled for a year or two because of his "meddling" from his opponents' perspective.
Damascius as I mentioned had such influence that he and his followers were accept into the court for three years until Khosrow cucked the Byzantines and in the peace treaty forced Julian to annul the exile and allow the philosophers back into the Empire.

>>16369696
read pic related

>>16369723
>No platonic doctrine was elevated as official pagan theology.
No, indeed, instead hundreds of platonic ideals ideas and arguments were adopted AS christian theology.
If anything Justinian broke up a lovely marriage.

>>16369909
>Julian
sorry, meant Justinian's exile of the philosophers

>>16369909
>>16369696
and this was pic related

>>16369909
Do you not understand that by fringe I meant above all that Platonism was fringe not because their students and proponents had no sympathy from the political elite by who knows what reason (since it was not for intellectual reasons) but that their theology had no preeminence for them. Theology and intellectual matters were not highly regarded by politicians, this is what even Socrates and Plato have made clear. Why did Plotinus fail to establish Platonopolis in Campania? Rome did not care about it, it's simple.

>>16369938
Christianity is older than Platonism that started with Plato (not the one from the egyptians). Why do you people forget about the OT and jewish gnostic sects from the 100 BC?

>If anything Justinian broke up a lovely marriage.
He didn't break because Platonism was still prevalent in some christian mystics after justinian, actually much more prolific was the period after him.

>>16369964
do you think that posting the picture of a book will suffice to counter what I have said in this thread for hours? Just say something I cannot read a 500-page book in one day. Why would you post something you have not read?

>Pseudo-Dionysius
>Maximus the Confessor
>Gregory of Nyssa
>Hugh de Balma
>John Scotus Eriugena

Who else is worth reading on Christian Neoplatonism?

>>16371252
Ephrem.
Evagrius, but he's a "heretic".
Synesius, although he's practically not a christian.
Palamas, for Orthodox and Eastern Catholics.
The other Cappadocian fathers were also well versed in Rhetoric (which is the starting point for logic and platonic studies, since you learn how to reason).

>>16368013
I'm named after him

>>16371728
Hello Pseudo

>>16368013
>why does nobody care about the unsubstantiated mysticism of a confirmed fraud

>>16371968
>SAINT

>>16368271
>can I just pick up Pseudo-Dionysus and understand his work as a self-contained system or doctrine,

I think you could read at least his mystical writings - which are not long - and understand it.

His vision is rooted in the "dark cloud" Moses encountered on Mount Sinai.

>>16371252
Nicholas of Cusa

>>16371728
>browses /lit/
>literally named Pseud

Checks out

>>16371968
As opposed to that substantiated mysticism that's all the rage

>>16371252
Augustine, the Victorines, Bonaventure, Origen, Eckhart.

>>16371667
why is Evagrius considered a heretic? he was very influential and i have been planning to read his ascetical works

>>16372270
origenist, so he's not personally condemned but some of his beliefs; but don't ask me, I'm not a christian

>>16372270
Is eckhart Neoplatonic though? I always imagined him as his own thing

Tauler as well I guess

>>16368261
Neo Platonism is in the sinodicon and is condemned non stop as hereicy .

>>16373371
Which is such a glaring sign as undeniable as the dawn that the church, at least at the time but supposedly divinely inspired in this decision, had no idea wtf they were talking about.

>>16373404
no its because it full of bs, see >>16368605

>>16371252
Henry Suso

>>16370006
>Christianity is older than Platonism that started with Plato (not the one from the egyptians). Why do you people forget about the OT and jewish gnostic sects from the 100 BC?
Holy fucking cringe...

>>16374995
oh yes christianity has nothing to do with genesis and the books from ot