I was looking around for Schuon's most concise description of the cosmic flowchart, and it appears to be in an essay called Dimensions, Modes and Degrees of the Divine Order. There's even a condensed version of it in The Essential Writings of Frithjof Schuon -- only eight pages to describe the whole existentialada!
In fact, it can be further condensed into a single sentence:
The idea that the Supreme Principle is both Absolute Reality and, for that very reason, Infinite Possibility, can suffice unto itself, for it contains everything, notably the necessity for a universal Manifestation.
Not the necessity for this manifestation, of course, but for a Manifestivus within the Godhead itself, which we call the Second Person of the Trinity.
Perhaps it isn't kosher to think of the latter this way, but it's how I'm built, and there's not a damn thing I can do about it. Might as well try to convince me that E ain't mc or that pie aren't round.
Absolute Reality and Infinite Possibility. Wait, that's only two. Is there room in there for a third Principle or Person, or is that too crowded?
we may envisage a third hypostatic element, namely the Perfect Quality; being the Absolute, the Principle is thereby the Infinite and the Perfect. Absoluteness of the Real, infinitude of the Possible, perfection of the Good; these are the "initial dimensions" of the Divine Order.
I have questions. First, can this abstract account be harmonized with a properly Christian metaphysic, second, is there such a thing as a "Christian metaphysic" over and apart from Christian revelation, and third, is faith in this revelation "higher" than knowledge and understanding of the metaphysics?
I ask the latter question in particular because in the traditional view, faith is ordered to God's revelation of himself, such that faith is said to be a kind of obscure pre-knowledge of its proper object, an object we can otherwise never apprehend short of the beatific vision, when all will be revealed. Until then, bestwecando is have faith in God's revelation.
Still, I wonder.... is this really the bestwecando? Supposing I want to go a little further. Is that wrong? Should I not do that? Is this sort of thing frowned upon? If so I gotta plead ignorance, because I've worked in a lot of offices, and I tell you, people do it all the time.
I certainly mean no disrespect, I just think -- as I've said before -- that if God goes to all the trouble to reveal himself as Trinity -- and seriously, what trouble! I just read a book on the history of the early church, what with the martyrs and persecutions and catacombs.... Lotta blood, but at the same time, what did they know that we've forgotten? Must have been pretty earth-shattering.
I'm thinking about the 34th pope, whoever he was. Why him? Because the first thirty three were martyred, so he must have been a pretty jittery guy, waiting for the other shoe to drop. At any rate,
the reader is struck by evidence of a courage so sublime that, viewed on the human plane alone, it places these tens of thousands of willing victims among the most outstanding heroes the world has ever known. As they faced death, all, from the most famous to the most humble, gave proof of a steadfastness of spirit and a tranquility which frequently aroused the admiration even of those who did not share the faith.
We're veering into a rather different post, my only point being all that trouble, and for what? For that little mustard seed?
What a small, insignificant thing this Church had been, on the day her Founder died the death of a common agitator on a bare hilltop.... Less than two hundred years after this date she existed everywhere.
Different post, dude.
Is it really, Petey? Is it really?
Yes it is. Now get back to the subject at hand.
Okay. We're thinking about the cosmic flowchart, and can't help but be struck by the threeness -- not fourness or twoness -- in Schuon's description:
Absolute, Infinite, and Perfect; for each divine mode participates by definition in the nature of the divine Substance and thus comprises absolute Reality, infinite Possibility, and perfect Quality.... being Absolute, these modes cannot not be, and being Infinite, they are inexhaustible; being Perfect, they lack nothing.
Okay then. According to God's own self-revelation, He is a hypostatic union of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Is that it?
I have questions. But I'm a getting little fuzzy with hypoglycemia, so we'll resume in the next post.
7 comments:
Speaking of hypoglycemia (and apologies for veering off topic), have you ever had insulin go bad?
Just wondering. We have a diabetic dog, she gets two shots per day. Came toward the end of a vial earlier this week and she started showing signs of high-ish blood sugar. Switched to a new vial and all was well.
***
On the Trinity & trinities as such, it's interesting that for something to be properly stable, it really needs three legs to stand on. Also that it is impossible to have anything besides points and lines without a third point to make a plane or a third axis to bring about a third dimension, which is the space where all the most interesting activity becomes possible.
One might wonder why most lifeforms have bilateral symmetry. I suspect that's because the third element is hidden, the secret that keeps itself. In a biped, the muscles do the work of a third stable leg; with hearing and vision, a third eye or ear would be superfluous because that work is performed in the overlap between the two, etc. Or maybe that's just my half-awake brain imagining things.
Never had insulin go bad, and I routinely use it for longer than the 30 days they say you can use it after it's opened. More likely that the dog is increasingly insulin resistant, which especially happens in type 2.
As for the twoness, you've probably noticed the landscaping error people routinely make, of two trees or two rocks, which always looks wrong -- static and artificial. But toss in the third, and it comes to life.
Re. the insulin, good to know. That's the first time she's had an issue since we got her diagnosed & figured out the right dose.
Re. the twoness, indeed. A composition with only two main elements - especially of similar weight - usually looks a little too rigid. Except in the case of, say, a Madonna & Child, in which case the third element is the object of their gaze, whether that's each other or something outside the frame.
It's true for music too. Two musicians is just a stark duo, but with three you got yourself a band!
I haven't been listening to jazzs, but if I was looking for a standard CD for Dexter Gordon, I found this. I did not expect that “maybe it might be a scare”, but when I listen to it, it is a very relaxed performance, and this is pretty good! JAZZHUS in Copenhagen Live recording of MONTMARTRE. Denmark also had an uncle who growled “ye-i”.
In the early 1960s, the situation surrounding black jazz-musicians was harsh. Therefore, many musicians leaked to Europe. Originally Gordon was called “fall of the capital”, but this was the opportunity to travel to Europe, and life is a big turn. In a blessed environment, Gordon devoted himself to music activities and even a gigs that serve as guidance with citizen enthusiasts.
You can enjoy the enthusiasm of the members. For those who say three are a little, there is also a hand that says one by one.
For those who say three are a little, there is also a hand that says one by one.
Oriental Jazzman gets it!
Post a Comment