This is great stuff! I am reading John of Damascus's 'Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith', and was fascinated on his statement that the Tree of Knowledge granted "the power to know one's own nature." How does this potential for self knowledge fit into the communal ontology? Does self knowledge have to be given as a gift by the other? Does this mean avoiding good/bad judgements until self-knowledge has been given to you?
Also, since the fruit was taken on Adam's own initiative, does he really receive true knowledge of his own nature or just the appearance of it? I imagine him seeing the truth of his created nature, but not being able to comprehend it. He sees and passes judgement on his nakedness as shame instead of dispassion; he sees his created nature as something to overcome instead of fulfill, etc..
That's a great question which I'll need to reflect on deeply. I will point you right away to Christos Yannaras' "Enigma of Evil," you may find a more satisfactory response to your questions than the preliminary thoughts I will provide below.
Self-knowledge must be given through the other. We can understand with an optical analogy: an eyeball cannot gaze at itself. The other is the one who stands outside you and therefore can "circumscribe" you as an identity, see you for what you really are. Ultimately, this Other is God. God Himself is the source of this communal criteria, as the self-knowledge of all three divine persons consists precisely of their knowledge in and through each other. Fr Staniloae explains this incredibly in Experience of God Vol 1 chapter "Holy Trinity: Structure of Supreme Love." We know ourselves through sharing in the perspective of the other, thereby knowing the "whole" (self and other) as Plato would put it.
I think Adam did receive true knowledge of his nature but I think this very knowledge tormented his conscience, because in the very act of sinning he deformed his nature. Hence, shame and the covering with fig leaves + casting blame onto the other. Some Oriental saint put it amazingly (paraphrase): If Adam had waited to receive the fruit, he would've known good and evil while being good, but by seizing the fruit he knew good and evil while being evil.
It's interesting to see the relationship between self and other as the inward/outward flow (or communion) of knowing/loving. Then we also see the subject's inward flow is the object's outward and vice versa. Communion is the inherent knowing-loving of subject-object. To know is to love and to love is to know. In Christian parlance, communion is knowing God through the experience of His love.
Oh that's great you had a chance to review Schindler's work. It's thanks to him that I came to Balthasar back in my Eunoia days. He's also had some excellent talks with Ken Lowry that I would suggest. Hope you are well!
I need to get into Balthasar, I see so many cool quotes from him and everyone I trust vouches for him. I am overburdened by fantastic books (and I can’t complain).
We are actually talking with Dr. Schindler this Friday, which I’m very excited for. Live at 8:30 PM EST!
And likewise, Daniel! Blessings to you and your family.
It's a good problem to be overburdened by fantastic books! I think highly of Balthasar, and I would like to think him together with Austin Farrer, but I have not written that paper yet (days are too short, I fear). And that's wonderful you'll speak with Dr. Schindler on Friday! He's really great, and I wish you the best in that discussion. Have a great one!
This is great stuff! I am reading John of Damascus's 'Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith', and was fascinated on his statement that the Tree of Knowledge granted "the power to know one's own nature." How does this potential for self knowledge fit into the communal ontology? Does self knowledge have to be given as a gift by the other? Does this mean avoiding good/bad judgements until self-knowledge has been given to you?
Also, since the fruit was taken on Adam's own initiative, does he really receive true knowledge of his own nature or just the appearance of it? I imagine him seeing the truth of his created nature, but not being able to comprehend it. He sees and passes judgement on his nakedness as shame instead of dispassion; he sees his created nature as something to overcome instead of fulfill, etc..
Would love to hear your thoughts!
Thank you!
That's a great question which I'll need to reflect on deeply. I will point you right away to Christos Yannaras' "Enigma of Evil," you may find a more satisfactory response to your questions than the preliminary thoughts I will provide below.
Self-knowledge must be given through the other. We can understand with an optical analogy: an eyeball cannot gaze at itself. The other is the one who stands outside you and therefore can "circumscribe" you as an identity, see you for what you really are. Ultimately, this Other is God. God Himself is the source of this communal criteria, as the self-knowledge of all three divine persons consists precisely of their knowledge in and through each other. Fr Staniloae explains this incredibly in Experience of God Vol 1 chapter "Holy Trinity: Structure of Supreme Love." We know ourselves through sharing in the perspective of the other, thereby knowing the "whole" (self and other) as Plato would put it.
I think Adam did receive true knowledge of his nature but I think this very knowledge tormented his conscience, because in the very act of sinning he deformed his nature. Hence, shame and the covering with fig leaves + casting blame onto the other. Some Oriental saint put it amazingly (paraphrase): If Adam had waited to receive the fruit, he would've known good and evil while being good, but by seizing the fruit he knew good and evil while being evil.
Great analysis
It's interesting to see the relationship between self and other as the inward/outward flow (or communion) of knowing/loving. Then we also see the subject's inward flow is the object's outward and vice versa. Communion is the inherent knowing-loving of subject-object. To know is to love and to love is to know. In Christian parlance, communion is knowing God through the experience of His love.
Oh that's great you had a chance to review Schindler's work. It's thanks to him that I came to Balthasar back in my Eunoia days. He's also had some excellent talks with Ken Lowry that I would suggest. Hope you are well!
I need to get into Balthasar, I see so many cool quotes from him and everyone I trust vouches for him. I am overburdened by fantastic books (and I can’t complain).
We are actually talking with Dr. Schindler this Friday, which I’m very excited for. Live at 8:30 PM EST!
And likewise, Daniel! Blessings to you and your family.
It's a good problem to be overburdened by fantastic books! I think highly of Balthasar, and I would like to think him together with Austin Farrer, but I have not written that paper yet (days are too short, I fear). And that's wonderful you'll speak with Dr. Schindler on Friday! He's really great, and I wish you the best in that discussion. Have a great one!
Unconditional love is needed. Non-causality is needed. To transcend others is to transcend yourself,and that is the point where the gap ceases.