The Philosopher's God | Pantheism in Greek Thought
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 07. 2024
- What do Thales, Heraclitus, Pythagoras, Parmenides, Plato, Stoicism and Plotinus have in Common? Were they all Pantheist? Maybe.
Pantheism Between the One and the Many.
Exploring the attempts of the Ionians (Anaximenes, Thales, Anaximander, Heraclitus and Anaxagoras), the Eleatics (Xenophanes and Parmenides), Pythagoras, Plato, Stoicism and Neoplatonism, To Mend the Broken Relationship between Being and Becoming, the Absolute and the Relative, the Ideal and the Actual, the Infinite-Unchanging with the Finite and Transient. What we call God and the World.
00:00 Intro to Greek Pantheism
00:40 Orphism | Phanes
01:11 Ionians | Arche
06:40 Eleatics | Being
10:57 Plato | The Good
15:59 Stoicism | Logos
18:54 Plotinus | The One
26:44 Post-Script Thoughts
35:31 Merch!!!
#Pantheism #GreekPhilosophy #PreSocratics
Check out our other Pantheism vids: • Pantheism
Join us next week as we continue our History of Pantheism, Right through the Middle Ages and into the Renaissance.
Recommend Reading:
Ancient Philosophy, Mystery, and Magic by Peter Kingsley
Presocratic Philosophers by Geoffrey Kirk
The Presocratic Philosophers by Jonathan Barnes
The First Philosophers by Robin Waterfield (ed.)
Early Greek Philosophy by Jonathan Barnes
The Presocratics by Edward Hussey
Philosophy Before Socrates by Richard McKirahan
Join us:
facebook: / seekersofunity
instagram: / seekersofunity
twitter: / seekersofu
website: www.seekersofunity.com
Thank you to our beloved Patrons: Little Hobbitus, Adam, Alexandra, Curly Joe, Chelsea, Jonathan and Charley Broon.
Join them in Supporting us:
patreon: / seekers
donate: paypal.com/paypalme/seekersofu
seekersofunity.com/shop/ :)
Phanes didn't came from the orphic egg thats fake but phanes is the all pantheism everything is phanes he created chronos and anake and phanes has no beginning he is omnipotent omniscience omnipresent he is all and all is in him that means he has no beginning. How thats phanes
Thank you Lety for the correction. Much appreciated.
Stoic Pantheist here. Just saw this video and I can't wait to watch all your pantheist and mysticism videos!
So glad you liked it. Thanks for the kind feedback 🙏🏼
We are on a similar path/journey, Zevi. I am highly interested in Mysticism, Neoplatonism, Pantheism, Stoicism, Sufism, Taoism, and Zen-Buddhism. Hopefully it all will make more and more sense to me.There is so much to explore still. Thanks for all the work you are still doing!
Wow! An excellent summary of early Greek thinking. I feel as though it's 1962 and I'm back in college. For a young person, you have such a scholarly grasp of the material and present it so enthusiastically. You and your channel are signs of light and hope in a lost and dark world. Thank you so much for all of your efforts and good work.
Thank you Tony 🙏🏼
It is incredible how these ideas were simultaneously being developed in India in the Upanishads. Parmenides and Heraclitus are similar to the later Advaita Vedanta position, and Plato and Plotinus are closer to the Dvaitaadvaita (or BhedaaBheda) and Kashmiri Shaiva position.
Found this community thru Dr Sledge. A blessing for sure. I appreciate your work. Thank you for sharing it.
You’re most welcome. Thank you for coming over and thank you to Dr. Sledge for the recommendation. Hope you enjoy what you find.
Another great video where I learned so much. I'm so loving this series on pantheism, everything in this video was basically brand new to me and my brain's loving it. Glad you did the postscript- love the term "dialectical monism", way helpful way to describe and conceptualize this idea. Will be rewatching this one a bunch this week. Thanks for these videos and for spreading unity, oneness. Metta metta!
Thank you so much Chelsea. So nice to hear that you’re loving it and learning. And glad you liked the postscript, I was nervous about including it because it was kinda unpolished, but so glad you, and hopefully others, found it helpful. You’re most welcome, thank you and thank you for helping us that good unity, and oneness, with love.
This guy is brilliant
Great presentation! I loved the bit where you compared the neo-platonic "great chain of being"-concept with kabbalah and other traditions, and it sparked my thinking. Are you planning to do a comparison of that form of emanationism with the emanationism of Tantric Shaivism? In the latter tradition the unchanging absolute is Shiva - fully expanded awareness - and the changing multiplicity is the power of Shakti, together they are a non-dual unity consisting of both immanent dynamism (the many) as well as transcendent voidness (the one).
What fascinates me most abut this comparison is that in the non-dual Shiva/Shakti tradition, there is no hierarchical chain of being where the great Self at the top is somehow superior or better to the world of manifestation. They are both seen as equally divine and mutually dependent, but apart from that the metaphysical map has many striking similarities. Any thoughts?
Thank you Eric. We touched on a comparison with Tantric Shaktism in last video, you may have seen it: czcams.com/video/hZCCZ3KzH8g/video.html A lightly sketched some lines of thinking that could definitely be explored at greater length. There are some very fruitful comparisons to be make on a global level with the relationship between Shakti and Shiva as expressed in the cosmological metaphysics of Shaktism and Shaivism, as you rightly point out.
The notion of equality and lack of hierarchical posturing is a very interesting one, and definitely fit into a larger trend of mystical thought across traditions. One often finds with traditions dual schemas of reality/emanation/manifestation, where, take Jewish mysticism for example, we have one linear, hierarchical, (masculine) schema, called variously; yosher (straight), memaleh (filling/penetrating), kav (line, beam), etc. Complemented by the simultaneous alterative encompassing, equalizing, (feminine) schema, called variously; igul (circle), sovev (surrounding), etc. (There is a third category which transcends and holds, contains, swallows this ‘dichotomy’ entirety, that of Eztem, Essence. Perhaps no different with the relationship of Shakti/Shiva to Brahman lets say, or some equivalent alternative).
There’s definitely a lot of fascinating work to be done here, and we’re really only just begging to scratch the surface. But, just to end off, I think that one of the purposes of such comparisons is that by finding these commonalities and noting the continuities (as well as the fascinating, often more telling, discontinuities) to begin to strip away the these truths, poetic, mythological, metaphysical, ethical, religious, psychological human truths, from their particularistic, sometimes parochial encasements, where they can sometimes be lost, trapped or neutered of their power to really change us, or to really reach those of us who, for whatever reason, feel unable to access these truths in the depth of the jungle their unique religious habitats. (I think this is where, for example, some careful, cautious and educated comparisons between ancient cosmologies and contemporary science may benefit many).
Just some thoughts.
I'm gonna buy a hoodie to support some kickback. We think very alike brother, and I appreciate what you are doing. It's what is right. You're in the right place. I hope sometime to speak with you further and help you grow to find more who seek the teachings. Thanks again. I'm appreciative to share a lifetime with you, it's an honor.
Hey Ariana. This comment has quite literally left me inarticulate. Being able to find a deep affinity and alignment with the path and thinking of another is a rare and beautiful experience and I’m getting a sense of that reflected back from you. I deeply appreciate you taking the effort to reach out and share that and really look forward to speaking with you and thinking together about how we can unite more seekers, seeking unity. You’re most welcome and thank you. It’s an honor to share a lifetime with one who appreciates sharing a lifetime with another on their same ‘wavelength.’ What a touchingly poetic thought. Thank you.
Pythagoras' mathematics applied to the Zohar seems valuable
Plotinus is the wall I hit back in the 1980s. Never got further with him. I knew I wanted to read him. He had things to teach me but I had to confess I got lost rather quickly. I wish I had more intelligence. God, the ONE .... is a mystery wrapped in an enigma. I don't understand God. There are things and experiences for which there is no good answer. Let God be God? I really don't think anyone knows what God is. We are all guessing. Love is enough.
>That moment when you realize there is a backlog of content to catch up on.
Good stuff. Your series on pantheism and your series on Kabbalah are the most in depth I have seen on CZcams. I have yet to dive into the one on Sufism, but I suspect it will be a similar experience.
Thank you friend 🙏🏼 We hope you enjoy it :)
🙏
Parmenides my favorite nailed the 2d - 3d holographic universe ADS CFT universe.Plato followed.
very amazing work, I would love to hear you talk about panentheism and its relation to pantheism along with the development of the philosophy of panentheism.
There is a mistake in the greek texts: Π equal P, and P equals R. So, Plato equals Πλάτων.
you have excellent preparation and competence. excellent explanatory ability.
Thank you kindly. It’s hard from behind a camera and screen, but i’m glad it comes through.
Wow. I'm blown away by how amazing this presentation is. I'm gonna watch it twice. The whole thing about time and inevitability (Orphism) was a perfect setup for the lecture.
I figured Plotinus would get some mention, but I was surprised (and gladdened) to see Plato himself get significant coverage. I love Plato. He's one of my favorite philosophers.
A note on Neoplatonism: it's funny to me how Neoplatonists are considered "monists" when they (like Plato) believed that the body was a prison for the soul. But that's probably me taking the Modern dualist/monist template and superimposing it upon an ancient philosophy. In any case, I can see how "the one" is assumed to be a monistic, pantheistic entity.
Can't wait for the next installment.
Thank you. Ya of course, we had to address Plato, even if more serious scholars will scold us. Yea, Neoplatonism had a interesting relationship with matter/body, but I think they still qualify as monists/pantheists, for reason we briefly mentioned in the video. We’ll have to get into in greater length another time, it definitely deserves our time and attention. Also I don’t think all systems which we conceive as ‘dualistic’ are actually so, they may in fact be polaristic, bi-or-dialogical, which isn’t incompatible at all with monistic thinking, but often part and parcel. I hope this makes sense. Again, we’ll have to devote more time to this in the future.
Much love,
Zevi
@@SeekersofUnity Much love back at you, man. I find your idea that "dualism/monism aren't so precisely defined as we think" pretty intriguing. Introducing the category of "polaristic" into the metaphysics just intrigues me more. (I'd love to hear more of your thinking on this.
I'd love to hear more about that... either in your vids or in your comments. But it seems at first glance that, the correct conclusion is: bodies and souls are really the same substance... a substance which is monistic. But (like Spinoza noted) differing attributes can make one substance appear as two distinct ones.
Anyway, long story short, just glad to read and hear your thoughts on things.
Thank you for videos !
You’re most welcome. Thank you for watching and sharing ☺️
You’re most welcome. Thank you for watching and sharing ☺️
Have you ever looked into Mystical Gnostic Alchemy, I think you would find it very interesting and have many similarities, Like the concept of Prima Materia!
Keep up the good Labour!
Thank you friend. Looked into it a little but not enough. Lots to learn. Welcome.
to expand on your P.S. - What led me to the Monist/Pantheist conclusion was considering the nature of anything existing at all. This is a common theme throughout these thinkers. The something from nothing idea is logically impossible, and it leads to people who value logic to try to reconcile that Idea in some way. Even without reconciling it, one can easily conclude that multiple somethings coming from nothing is exponentially more impossible. I think this is another possible primary motivator for these types of ideas.
Hmm. We’ll have to think about that. Thank you for adding it to the mix.
Got to this video from "Did the Greek Philosophers Study Buddhism?" and I was a little concerned. When we characterize Heraclitus as saying you can never step in the same river twice, this is not accurate. What H says is "Up on him who steps in the same river, different and different waters flow." Likewise, it's a mischaracterization to say H believed all things are "flux." Both of these mischaracterizations belong to anglo-american analytic glosses on the ancient texts and repeating them here suggests a relatively superficial interaction with the literature. There's lots of stuff in here like that, so I'm afraid this discussion can take us only so far. Also, and this is just an fyi, H's name is pronounced Hair-uh-kly-tuhs.
as always, trully a great presentation.
Thank you so much Daniel.
@@SeekersofUnity gonna try to share this on forums, cant believe we arent on the 100k yet with this quality
With fans like you we’ll be there in no time 😉
Thank you for sharing, supporting and believing in us.
Well I can tell you from personal experience that having a mystical experience, then trying to make sense of it, can certainly lead one to contemplate the absolute vs. the relative, oneness, etc. Personally, I had absolutely no interest in religion, spirituality, or even philosophy before. I went from agnostic to gnostic. So it is very interesting to me to think about coming to that point from a philosophical or intellectual path. You've given me a lot to think about with this video. I may need to watch again.
Thank you Justin 🙏🏼 Glad to be able to challenge one another.
Nice! I really appreciate what you're doing here. Interesting tidbit at the beginning about the word 'Ionian' meaning just 'Greek' in some languages - I had no idea. Heraclitus' views on this topic are exemplified in the fragment T.S. Eliot quotes at the start of 'Burnt Norton' (one of his Four Quartets): τοῦ λόγου δὲ ἐόντος ξυνοῦ ζώουσιν οἱ πολλοί ὡς ἰδίαν ἔχοντες φρόνησιν:
though the divine principle is common [to all], many people live as they have a private mind. (That this logos later makes an appearance in John's gospel just goes to show, I think, how important some knowledge of the Greek philosophical tradition can be to Christians!) If I can just venture some constructive feedback, to apeiron has three syllables (did I hear four?); and I would take care with those Greek letters (Plato's name in your slide ends with a theta rather than an omega!)
Thank you James. We appreciate that you appreciate it. Thank you for your warm feedback and helpful corrections. We autodidactics are a little hopeless.
I really enjoyed this series. Thank you 🙏.
I do wonder why you started the series calling Pantheism "dangerous "..?
You’re most welcome. Thank you. The belief that everything is God can lead to a dangerous moral relativism.
Yours,
Zevi
Great video it also seems strange to me that so many people blanket ancient civilizations as these barbaric religions when in reality it’s much more in depth atleast in philosophical circles which a good chunk of Roman’s were apart of
I'm curious to what extent the early Greek pantheists and later Jewish mystics (e.g., the Kabbalists) were influenced by Eastern philosophies, like Hinduism and Buddhism, which also incorporated somewhat pantheistic ideas. What is the evidence that these Greek and later thinkers were aware of these Eastern religious ideas?
Gorgeous video. I'm curious if you have ever studied eastern traditions that, in my humble opinion, successfully rectify the schism between The Divine & the transient -- specifically, the Tantric philosophy of Kashmiri Shaivism & Dzogchen (aka Ati Yoga) of Tibetan Buddhism. Both incredibly powerful traditions, with pragmatic accessible practices to not only inquire about the divine, but also to tangibly recognize it.
Thank you Royal. Yes, we seekers are students of all the worlds many beautiful mystical traditions. Check out the sister video we make to this one on Eastern Pantheism.
ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος
In Arche (the beginning) was the Logos (the Word) and the Logos was facing God and God was the Logos.
As Plotinus believed in reincarnation you might already have taken him,or his essence,for a dinner date!He is said to have died from a strange skin disease possibly the rare lymphoma now called Mycosis Fungoides.
Plotino and Maldacena marriage
1d Strings
2d Brana
3+1 D Holographic space time reallity
What does that actually mean?
I wonder why all these questions of existence are asked at this time? Whereas before the Greeks these questions were asked and answered in the time of abraham? So we're these greek philosophers starting again in darkness or being reborn?
@Y K thankyou.
@Y K this I agree with.
@Y K this on the other hand is partially true that solomon taught how the universe works through angels and demons then overtime the paganism set in and these angels and demons were turned into gods and godeses with an added human touch of sexuality greed lust etc etc...and what the Greek philosophers were waking up to by leaving the so called way of the gods was the light of the Lords intellect which was once again shining through the darkness of deception.
The Greeks were the first to do away with mythology and address these ideas with reason. They did away with the theological nonsense that plagues religion and their ideas have been used by the Jews, Christians and Muslims too understand their religions from then to the present day.
@@invisiblechurch9621 the reason REASON was used is while prophets were around there was no need for REASON because people SAW LISTENED and BELEIVED so to say the Greeks used REASON(bytheway Greeks didn't invent reason their writing about it was preserved whilst they burnt the rest 😂) because they wanted to get rid of mythology MYTHOLOGY was the norm and reality the reason REASON was used by the GREEKS was to stop themselves from going mad becaue they had no hearts now be REASONABLE when I say they had no HEARTS.
I don't feel any unchanging part to my personality.
Did you always feel that way?
@@SeekersofUnity I don't know. If I did, that would count as an unchanging part? Hahaha
@@SeekersofUnity There are certainly stable patterns that I gravitate around and go back to. But to call it unchanging seems weird. If there's something about my experience that is unchanging I think it would lie beyond my personality.
😉
I hear you. Ya, it may very well lie beyond your ‘personality.’ But I assume that there’s something of you that feels one with the six year old you. This is the paradox of identity.
There is great confusion in your presentation: it is not pantheistic, it is panentheistic.
The Biblia are so sexual. Something from nothing can be explained, mathematically or religiously, in child birth terminology.
The Holy Spirit brings people together, and babies happen sometimes. Math checks out.