Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 07-11-2012, 01:16 AM

Here's one of many statements about the secret doctrine in the longer gospel of Mark used by the Marcionites:

Quote:

a certain good (power), and (one) that pities the groaning of these (souls), and the disorderly and wicked device of furious Strife. And (likewise Friendship is) eager, and toils to lead forth little by little the souls from the world, and to domesticate them with unity, in order that all things, being conducted by herself, may attain unto unification. Therefore on account of such an arrangement on the part of destructive Strife of this divided world, Empedocles admonishes his disciples to abstain from all sorts of animal food. For he asserts that the bodies of animals are such as feed on the habitations of punished souls. And he teaches those who are hearers of such doctrines (as his), to refrain from intercourse with women. (And he issues this precept) in order that (his disciples) may not co-operate with and assist those works which Strife fabricates, always dissolving and forcibly severing the work of Love.[Philosophumena 7:18]

Marcion saw Jesus as bringing together divided souls but to be against the pairing of men with women. The idea is presented elsewhere as a direct accusation against Marcion - "you dissolve marriages that have been cemented by the Deity. And here again you conform to the tenets of Empedocles, in order that for you the work of Love may be perpetuated as one (and) indivisible. For, according to Empedocles, matrimony separates unity, and makes (out of it) plurality, as we have proved."

Human beings only come in two sexes so if the mystic gospel of Mark was against the pairing of men with women then it must necessarily have secretly advocated same sex pairings. Indeed the difficulty has always been in discovering what Empedocles actually meant by two souls being brought back together by Love. The French authority on Empedocles suggests that Aristophanes's famous speech in Plato's Symposeum was consciously developed from the same philosopher where it is declared:

Quote:

Each of us when separated, having one side only, like a flat fish, is but the tally-half of a man, and he is always looking for his other half. Men who are a section of that double nature which was once called androgynous are lovers of women; adulterers are generally of this breed, and also adulterous women who lust after men. The women who are a section of the woman do not care for men, but have female attachments; the female companions are of this sort. But they who are a section of the male follow the male, and while they are young, being slices of the original man, they have affection for men and embrace them, and these are the best of boys and youths, because they have the most manly nature.

Some indeed assert that they are shameless, but this is not true; for they do not act thus from any want of shame, but because they are valiant and manly, and have a manly countenance, and they embrace that which is like them. And these when they grow up become our statesmen, and these only, which is a great proof of the truth of what I am saying. When they reach manhood they are lovers of youth, and are not naturally inclined to marry or beget children,--if at all, they do so only in obedience to custom; but they are satisfied if they may be allowed to live with one another unwedded;

And such a nature is prone to love and ready to return love, always embracing that which is akin to him. And when one of them meets with his other half, the actual half of himself, whether he be a lover of youth or a lover of another sort, the pair are lost in an amazement of love and friendship and intimacy, and one will not be out of the other's sight, as I may say, even for a moment: these are the people who pass their whole lives together, and yet they could not explain what they desire of one another. For the intense yearning which each of them has towards the other does not appear to be the desire of lover's intercourse, but of something else which the soul of either evidently desires and cannot tell, and of which she has only a dark and doubtful presentiment.

Suppose Hephaestus, with his instruments, to come to the pair who are lying side by side and to say to them, 'What do you mortals want of one another?' They would be unable to explain. And suppose further, that when he saw their perplexity he said: 'Do you desire to be wholly one; always day and night in one another's company? for if this is what you desire, I am ready to melt and fuse you together, so that being two you shall become one, and while you live live a common life as if you were a single man, and after your death in the world below still be one departed soul, instead of two--I ask whether this is what you lovingly desire and whether you are satisfied to attain this?'

There is not a man of them who when he heard the proposal would deny or would not acknowledge that this meeting and melting into one another, this becoming one instead of two, was the very expression of his ancient need.

Here is the reference from Marwan Rashed where he argues that the speech in the Symposeum is Empedoclean- http://books.google.com/books?id=deo...uality&f=false

Adam · 07-11-2012, 11:52 PM

I read the Republic a long time ago, and don't remember such clear details of this speech, but the speaker must have been the famous traitor-tyrant Alcibiades, not Aristophanes (the satirist of Socraties in his play "The Clouds"). (Nor is Aristophanes to be confused with the scientist Aristarchus as I did recently, probably here on FRDB.)

stephan huller · 07-12-2012, 12:03 AM

It's Aristophanes. This is a very famous speech from a very famous book albeit not very well known in modern America apparently. There are things everyone needs to know http://www.anselm.edu/homepage/dbanach/sym.htm Like Sun Ra once said, it's already after the end of the world ...

Toto · 07-12-2012, 12:17 AM

It's a character named Aristophanes

Per wikipedia,

Quote:

Aristophanes (speech begins 189c): he at first skips his turn because of a bout of hiccups. The eminent comic playwright has become a focus of subsequent scholarly debate. His contribution has been seen as mere comic relief, and sometimes as satire: the creation myth he puts forward to account for heterosexuals and homosexuals may be read as poking fun at the myths of origin numerous in classical Greek mythology.

stephan huller · 07-12-2012, 12:24 AM

I don't understand the distinction. It's a literary work which makes reference to Aristophanes the playwright. It's a reminiscence of Aristophanes's interest in Empedocles likely around the time of The Thesmophoriazusae which makes frequent reference to Empedoclean philosophy

http://books.google.com/books?id=tyx...docles&f=false

stephan huller · 07-12-2012, 12:29 AM

Quote:

I do not need to labor the fact that love and strife, which are not contraries anywhere else in the Symposium, are related and opposed by Aristophanes, though admittedly he scarcely applies them as Empedocles applies them. Moreover Aristophanes' threefold combinations of like and unlike may stem directly from Empedocles ; but that they stem from him alone would be dubious, inasmuch as the like-unlike principles could be taken from Heraclitus and others.

http://books.google.com/books?id=YU5...ove%22&f=false

stephan huller · 07-12-2012, 12:30 AM

Again that Aristophanes was parodying Empedocles

http://books.google.com/books?id=be0...docles&f=false

stephan huller · 07-12-2012, 12:31 AM

Quote:

Aristophanes is again parodying Empedocles, just as he does in Plato's Symposium

http://books.google.com/books?id=deo...docles&f=false

Toto · 07-12-2012, 12:33 AM

We cross posted. Do you think that this is an actual transcript of something Arisophanes said, or is Plato putting these words in his mouth?

stephan huller · 07-12-2012, 12:36 AM

I don't know. I am not an expert on anything related to Plato. My working hypothesis is that this French guy is probably closer to the mark than I will ever be.

Quote:

By a strange coincidence Agathon, a central character in Symp., is the butt of jokes in Thesm. Could this be a sign that the party described by Plato was an historical event and that part of the conversation had in effect centred on Empedocles?

http://books.google.com/books?id=deo...ral%22&f=false

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-11-2012, 11:52 PM	#2
Adam Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Dixon CA Posts: 1,150	I read the Republic a long time ago, and don't remember such clear details of this speech, but the speaker must have been the famous traitor-tyrant Alcibiades, not Aristophanes (the satirist of Socraties in his play "The Clouds"). (Nor is Aristophanes to be confused with the scientist Aristarchus as I did recently, probably here on FRDB.)

07-12-2012, 12:03 AM	#3
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	It's Aristophanes. This is a very famous speech from a very famous book albeit not very well known in modern America apparently. There are things everyone needs to know http://www.anselm.edu/homepage/dbanach/sym.htm Like Sun Ra once said, it's already after the end of the world ...

07-12-2012, 12:24 AM	#5
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	I don't understand the distinction. It's a literary work which makes reference to Aristophanes the playwright. It's a reminiscence of Aristophanes's interest in Empedocles likely around the time of The Thesmophoriazusae which makes frequent reference to Empedoclean philosophy http://books.google.com/books?id=tyx...docles&f=false

07-12-2012, 12:30 AM	#7
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Again that Aristophanes was parodying Empedocles http://books.google.com/books?id=be0...docles&f=false

07-12-2012, 12:33 AM	#9
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	We cross posted. Do you think that this is an actual transcript of something Arisophanes said, or is Plato putting these words in his mouth?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.