As the late fifth-century mystic Dionysius the Areopagite says, God is "the cause of being for all, but is itself nonbeing, for it is beyond all being" (McGilchrist).
It should not be forgotten that God as Beyond-Being, or suprapersonal Self, is absolute in an intrinsic sense, while Being or the divine Person is absolute extrinsically, that is, in relation to His manifestation or to creatures, but not in Himself, nor with respect to the Intellect which “penetrates the depths of God” (Schuon).
Let's suppose the Father is Beyond-Being, the Son Being, except eternally, such that there is no Beyond-Being without Being, and vice versa.
The main problem with Schuon's formulation is with the adjective "suprapersonal." Is this adjective gratuitous or essential? Or is it contradictory to say that the Self could be suprapersonal? What I am asking is: is person a species of self, or vice versa?
I'm gonna go with the ontological priority of Person, except that Personhood implies its Other, such that the ultimate Ground is this very relationship.
This notion of primordial Relation is difficult to describe and hard for people to conceive, so they -- at least implicitly -- think of it as Beyond Being (or at least beyond words and conception), but such a designation is nominal and not ontological.
What I mean by that last crack is that the ontology of Beyond-Being is Substance-in-Relation.
Now, this Substance-in-Relation appears to be a closed circle or private party, but it seems that the Relation itself is a Person too, and that this is our point of entry into the Mystery.
The purpose of the Incarnation is clearly to introduce us into this Mystery via the Spirit:
It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you.
That's pretty clear.
Then, "when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth" -- the metacosmic inter-Personal Truth of "I in them, and You in Me."
In the final analysis of the upshot of bottom line, I would speculate that RH is to Beyond-Being as LH is to Being, but that the mysterious Relation between is equally important, i.e., the Holy Corpus Colossum, or something, all chasing each other in a dynamic perichoresis in which dancer, dance, and music interpenetrate one another. Or something.
Well, at least we're finished with this 1,579 page beast. What next?
6 comments:
It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you.
And we're back to the space between the notes...
Gato Barbieri recorded on the N.Y.C. Bottom line on February 20-23, 1975. Members later get a long relationship (maybe from before?) in the “Liberation Orchestra.” The song was on the liners when LP was released, 1, sad milonga, 2, youth flowers, 3, Bahia, 4, blue rain. Woke up in Buenos Aires to the Gato verse, reminded of the scoop of pampa blowing scoop, brushing his arms with Lalo Schifrin band, and his wife brought to Italy the Don Cherry and free storms I think you created a masterpiece of Gato Jaz here. Even so, his tenor is “addicted” so be careful.
If I didn't know better I'd think there was something rather Joycian about this one.
We need some Japanese manga anime to accompany these reviews.
Here ya go
;)
The person in charge of the bass for this album is Herbie Lewis. Should I say synergistic effects on the album where Herbie and Billy Higgins (drums) co-starred, there is no loss at all. Also, since both of you are from LA and are on good terms, Aun (Aun)'s breathing is probably right. Moreover, the two of you had excellent pitch by nature.
In this album, you can fully enjoy jazz with momentum throughout. If I dare say it, all the songs have momentum, so if I had recorded even one ballad that would make me feel gorgeous, the situation might have changed. I imagine without permission that the two of you were also laughing with flickering flickering after recording, saying, “That was good now!”
Post a Comment