Divine names

The paper studies the place of the Areopagitic treatise 'Divine names' (Latin 'De divinis nominibus') in the tradition of Neoplatonic commentaries on Plato’s 'Cratylus' and focuses on the comparison with such a commentary by Proclus. A few arguments may prove that Pseudo-Dionysius could be well acquainted with this Proclus’ commentary, and therefore the Divine names could have been intentionally authored in a vein of imitation or competition with Proclus. The first three chapters of the 'Divine names' expound a set of theoretical propositions in such a detailed manner that allows reconstructing the dialectics used in the following chapters to explain the meanings of particular God’s names. Along with Neoplatonic philosophical language, these propositions inherit Proclus’ dialectics of the whole and parts, of the identity and difference, the ontological hierarchy, the doctrine of causation and participation, some noticeable features of apophaticism. All of them are relevant to the theory of naming and distinguishing types of names. An analysis of these principles makes possible to introduce the classification of names described in the 'Divine names' and the 'Celestial hierarchy' with significant similarities and differences when compared to the analogous classification of Proclus. The results obtained reveal how Proclean dialectics and ontology may be applied to the research of the Areopagitic ‘theolinguistics’ and its localization in the history of late Ancient and early Medieval philosophy.


Ареопагитический трактат «О божественных именах» рассматривается в перспективе традиции неоплатонического комментария на «Кратил» Платона, в котором особое место занимает комментарий Прокла. Предлагаются аргументы в пользу того, что псевдо-Дионисий не только был хорошо знаком с этим комментарием Прокла, но и осознанно выстраивал трактат «О божественных именах» в духе подражания или соперничества с ним. Отмечено преемство у Прокла как в отношении философской терминологии, так и в ряде концепций, включая диалектику целого и частей, тождества и различия, принцип онтологической иерархии, учение о причинности и причастности, некоторые особенности апофатического метода, – все они отражаются в принципах именования и различения видов имён. На основе анализа этих принципов предложена классификация имён, учитывающая основные их типы в трактатах «О божественных именах» и «О небесной иерархии», показаны сходства и различия с аналогичной классификацией у Прокла. Показано, что диалектика и онтология Прокла могут применяться для углубления понимания ареопагитической «теолингвистики» и её локализации в историко-философском контексте.

Résumé
Dans le Coran, Dieu l’unique se fait connaître par une multiplicité de noms exprimant ses attributs. Plus que les attributs, ce sont les noms divins qui ont inspiré la pensée théologique et philosophique en Islam, notamment chez le soufi Ibn ‘Arabī (m.1240) et, à sa suite, en milieu shī‘ite imâmite. L’article analyse ainsi la doctrine, à la fois traditionnelle et originale, élaborée par des gnostiques shī‘ites entre le XIVe et le XVIIe siècles (VIIIe-XIe s / anno Hegirae).  Partant d’un système complexe de classification et de hiérarchisation, ils développent l’idée d’une théophanie des noms divins pour rendre compte de ce monde, de l’au-delà et de l’homme, avant de rejoindre l’imâmologie shī‘ite par l’idée de l’Homme parfait comme manifestation du Nom suprême.
Abstract
In the Qur’an, the one God makes himself known through multiple names which express His attributes. More than the attributes, it is the divine names which have inspired theological and philosophical reflections within Islam, among others by the Soufi Ibn ‘Arabī (d. 1240) and, in his footsteps, among Imami Shī’is. This article analyses the doctrine set forth by gnostic Shī’is between the 14th and the 17th cent. (8th-11th cent. anno Hegirae). Relying on a complex taxonomic and hierarchical system, they developed the idea of a theophany of divine names in order to account for the world, for what lies beyond it, and for human beings, before converging with Shī’i imamology through the idea of the perfect Man as manifestation of the supreme Name.

Il presente articolo è dedicato alla riflessione di s. Tommaso d’Aquino – sulla modalità di nominazione dello Spirito Santo. Esso si compone di tre paragrafi. Nel primo, si presentano i limiti del linguaggio teologico in genere e le difficoltà nel nominare rispetto alle altre persone trinitarie. Nel secondo paragrafo, si illustrano i differenti tipi di nomi divini – intelligibili, simbolici, propri, trinitari – e si spiega il meccanismo dell’ appropriazione che permette di parlare specificamente di ciascuna persona della Trinità. Nel terzo paragrafo si analizzano i tre nomi propri dello Spirito – Spirito Santo, Amore, Dono – così come emergono dalla Summa Theologiae. L’articolo si chiude richiamando il metodo dei teologi medievali di unire lo sforzo necessario di dire l’indicibile e i limiti dei suoi risultati.

To Proslogion 12 “You are what you are through yourself”
(Cap 12: “quidquid es, non per aliud es quam per teipsum”). 

The Proslogion is the realization of a quest to know the existence and nature of God in the way that God exists. It attempts to realize now, in a different way than Augustine also required in Confessions 10, St Paul’s promise in I Corinthans 13.12 that human knowing of God would pass from a dim mirroring in something else to face to face knowledge, so that we would know  God in the way that God has known and knows us. “One argument that for its proof required no other save itself alone (unum argumentum, quod nullo alio ad se probandum quam se solo indigeret),”  would draw us into this equalization of our way of knowing and God’s knowing and being. Chapter 1 shows that this quest for face to face knowledge of God is essential to the human as rational. It is prayed for with great frequency in the Benedictine opus dei where the recitation of the psalter is central: “Your face I seek, your face, Lord, I require (Quæro vultum tuum; vultum tuum, domine, requiro).” [Proslogion, c. 1]. The meditative turn inward it necessitates is  the heart of monastic life, its raison d’être. Whether known within us or in the world, God is not known immediately.
The meditative turn or conversion of the soul is based in a distinction which saves the proof in Chapters 2-4: “[T]here is not only one sense in which something is ‘said in one’s heart’ or thought. For in one sense a thing is thought when the word signifying it is thought; in another sense when the very object which the thing is is understood. ([N]on uno tantum modo dicitur aliquid in corde vel cogitatur. Aliter enim cogitatur res cum vox eam significans cogitatur, aliter cum id ipsum quod res est intelligitur.]) ” [Proslogion, c. 4] The proof for God’s existence in Chapter 2 requiring the fool’s denial of God’s existence had been undermined by the proof in Chapter 3 that God so truly is as to be unable to be thought not to be (“Sic ergo vere es, domine deus meus, ut nec cogitari possis non esse”). The unthinkability of God’s non existence is required because otherwise the creature would be above the creator and would judge concerning the creator (“ascenderet creatura super creatorem”, et iudicaret de creatore.” [Proslogion, c. 3]
The quest to conform our knowing to God’s knowing and being depends on the power to compare forms of knowing, a property of reason. This comparison is the fundamental of the definition of God in the proof: “than which nothing greater can be thought (quo maius nihil cogitari potest).” [Proslogion, c. 2] It is given by faith: “we believe you to be that than which nothing greater can be thought (credimus te esse aliquid quo nihil maius cogitari possit)” [Chapter 2];  “what I believed before by your giving (quod prius credidi te donante)” [Proslogion, c. 4]. The difference between forms of knowing which belongs to reasoning contains the difference between faith, on the one hand, and the certain understanding to which the proofs in 2 to 4 brings him, on the other: “I understand now … by your illumination (iam …  intelligo te illuminante).” [Proslogion, c. 4]
That kind of difference is necessary to all coming to know so far as faith, or something analogous,  gives in an obscure and preliminary way the knowledge which is sought. Faith or its analogue allows reason to find and recognize what it seeks. The impossibility of immediate direct knowledge and the necessity of the climb through lower forms is indicated also in the fact that the proof in Chapter 2 is by the negation of a negation.  (The negation of the fool’s denial in a reductio ad absurdum). As well as by its explicit denial: “Lord, I do not attempt to penetrate your height, because my understanding is in no way equal to it (Non tento, domine, penetrare altitudinem tuam, quia nullatenus comparo illi intellectum meum).” [Proslogion, c. 2]. Comparison between the human and divine ways of knowing and being continues in Chapters 5 to 12 as Anselm attempts to ascribe the proper attributes to God.

This is a chapter of my 2016 book "The Indo-European names of Central Hispania" (Innsbruck, IBS), with general references added in the end. I contend that adjectives in -ilo- like nubilus, pumilus or rutilus go back to regular adjectives in -ido- by way of dissimilation of dental sounds. A novel etymology of the divine name Pan, Skt.Pusan, is offered.

This report provides scanned images of a non-figurative Ethiopian magic scroll for Yemeru Walda-Ab. Its imagery is of the diagrammatic type and has high talismanic density. Brief curatorial notes are included, including analyses of client name insertions, one of the drawings and some voces magicae, but the main intention is to provide high-resolution (zoomable) images that will allow others virtual access to the artifact.

In his "exhortation to the reader," which appeared in the 1602 edition of what is now called the Reina-Valera version/Bible (Spanish), Cipriano de Valera wrote about the importance of the divine name in Scripture. 
Here is part of what he wrote, translated into English. 
Page 1:  Quotation of Psalm 1, “think in the law of Jehovah (of) day and (of) night.
Page 5: “Whose name is Jehovah.”
Page 9-11: C. de V. on the Importance of the name.
Page 10: "But the holy patriarchs and prophets took great comfort with this name; they wrote it and pronounced it, and they made oaths by the [name]. Read their writings. How many times do they say, 'Bless Jehovah'?  The 69th Psalm has 13 verses in which the name Jehovah is pronounced 11 times.  The 19th Psalm has 12 verses in which King David names Jehovah 18 times."

This paper attempts a cross-examination of divine holiness and transcendence. Contemporary continental philosophy shows both concern and embarrassment when dealing with God’s transcendence. It is often interpreted as an exclusion from this world. The underlying projection belongs to some residual Deism of our age. By analyzing three biblical accounts of holiness (Hosea 11; Isaiah 6; Exodus 3), this paper proposes a requalification of transcendence according to the narratives through which it is revealed and addressed to three specific partners of God. Ultimately, holiness proves to be the transforming power of God.

Hristos, Mesia, Mântuitorul, Fiul lui Dumnezeu, Fiul Omului, Logosul: oare între atâtea titluri mai recunoaștem Numele lui Dumnezeu? Care era semnificația numelui Iisus în iudaismul celui de-al Doilea Templu și ce se întâmplă cu acest nume, în mediul iudeo-creștin, după Întruparea, Răstignirea și Învierea Mântuitorului? Care este diferența între persoana Iisus și numele ,,Iisus”? Cum și când ajung primii creștini ,,să cheme numele Domnului” (Ioil 3, 5, cf. Fap 2, 21), cu referire la Iisus? Când anume are loc trecerea de la expresia veterotestamentară ,,numele Domnului” la sintagma „numele Domnului Iisus” și mai apoi la metonimia ,,Numele” din scrierile neotestamentare? Cum se răsfrânge teandria Mântuitorului asupra numelui Iisus? Cum anume se ajunge la adorarea numelui teofor Iisus împreună cu numele divin YHWH, fenomen unic în lumea iudaică? Care sunt raporturile dintre invocarea numelui divin Iisus și puterea, respectiv autoritatea acestuia? În ce anume constă rolul sfințitor al Numelui în raport cu botezul, mirungerea, euharistia și chiar crucea? Prin ce se deosebește folosirea ritualică a numelui Iisus față de practicile magice în care se conjură numele divine? Cum a evoluat teologia numelui Iisus după anul 70 d.H., când începe separarea creștinilor de evrei? Ce legătură există între această teologie iudeo-creștină a numelui și "rugăciunea lui Iisus" apărută ulterior în monahismul egiptean și lumea siriacă?
Posibile răspunsuri la aceste întrebări le găsiți în cartea de față, unde autorul regăsește rădăcinile iudeo-creștine ale "rugăciunii inimii", pornind de la puterea rostirii cu credință a Numelui mai presus de orice nume – Iisus.

The Talmudic sugya at BT Sanhedrin 38a is devoted to theological claims based on Scripture, which are ascribed to heretics, and to their refutation. One of these claims focuses on a syntactical difficulty in Ex. 24:1, purportedly the basic for an heretical argument for the existence of a second god. This argument is answered by an otherwise unknown rabbinic sage, Rav Idit, in a manner that is commonly understood as identifying God, mentioned in that verse, with the arch-angel Metatron. The present study points to various difficulties inherent in this reading of the dispute, and following the interpretation of the 11th century north African Talmud commentator, R. Hannanel, it offers a different reading, according to which the focus of that anti-heretical dispute is rather Ex. 23:20-21. As the dispute is Babylonian in its origin, and the rabbi is using a Persian (or Parthian) loan word – parvanka – it should be read against a specifically Babylonian background. Following the use of the word parvanka in Mandaic texts, this paper suggests that the dispute relates to the exalted, divine, status accorded to angels in Mandaic religion.

Origen has long been believed to have added nothing new to logic than could have been conceived by the later Stoa in an abortive anticipation of modern formal logic.  Origen’s logic has thus come to be relegated by the majority of Origenists to little more than a footnote to Stoic logic.  Robert Somos has recently argued, against this communio opinio, that Origen’s logic cannot be simply reduced to Stoic logic.  He has, however, declined to develop its implication into a theological interpretation of Origen’s logic in light of the first principles of the Trinity.  Origen’s logic is, I suggest, a consequence of, rather than a condition for, the first principles of the Trinity.  Origen appears to highlight this trinitarian logic in his Commentary on the Song of Songs, where the supreme science of ‘epoptics’ appears not to substitute for but to supersede logic as the science of the supersensible ideas cycling in and through the divine dialectic of the Trinity.  Origen’s logic is, I wish to argue, a radiant reflection of the divine dialectic that shines forth from the first principles of the Trinity, through all the angels and spirits, into the spirit of human thinking, which thinks through the first principles of logic even as it thinks through the first principles of philosophical theology.

BAHA'I CALENDAR
Sample Article posted by "Facts on File"

Excerpt from 2016 "Facts on File" ebook for high school students:

Baha'i Faith: A Quick Reference
Christopher Buck
Copyright 2016 Facts On File. All rights reserved.

BAHA'I CALENDAR

The Baha’i calendar, like all calendrical systems, charts physical time; yet the Baha’i calendar also inspires spiritual progress by associating time with reminders of human nobility. The new year begins on the vernal equinox (which is astronomically determined and falls on March 19, 20, or 21 on the Gregorian calendar); it consists of 19 months, each month of which is comprised of 19 days. The calendar, called the "Wondrous (Badi) Calendar," invests time with spiritual significance by naming weekdays, days of the month, months, years, and cycles of years after godly perfections that can be translated into goodly virtues. In this way the Baha’i calendar transforms time into opportune moments for reflection on matters of the spirit.

For example, Sunday, March 21, 2010, on the Gregorian calendar may be expressed as follows on the Baha’i calendar: the weekday of Beauty (Jamal, i.e., Sunday), the (first) day Splendor (Baha’) in the (first) month of Splendor (Bahá’) in the year (15th) of Affection (Vidad), in the cycle (19 years) of Unity (Vahid) of the first Grand Cycle (361 years) of All Things (Arabic, Kullu Shay’; Persian, Kull-i Shay’).

In the Baha’i calendar, the names represent far more than simple designations of units of time. They connect to the timeless progress of the soul. The calendar was originally created by the Bab, Baha’u’llah's predecessor and herald, who compared the souls of human beings to mirrors. These mirrors, once burnished and polished by spiritual efforts, are potentially reflections of all divine names and attributes of God that are capable of expression in human existence. To the extent that a person is a bearer of one of the names (i.e., qualities or powers) of God, that individual is empowered to express that quality in human action. (Buck and Melton have called this process "theophoric metamorphosis.") Through the progressive spiritualization of all persons—and, indeed, of all things—the Bab wished to transform all of reality into “mirrors” reflecting the perfections represented by these divine names.

In this unique calendric system, each and every unit of time gives pause for spiritual reflection. This is part of the Bab's comprehensive system of precepts and practices, all calculated to keep the believer in a constant spiritual frame of mind. Each of these dynamic names of God highlights a distinctive quality of sterling character and human nobility; they may not only be invoked, but they may be evoked. At every moment, a person, noting the present time, takes time to reflect on a godly perfection that can be translated into a goodly virtue expressed in thought and deed. By doing so, the mirror of the human heart, or soul, may reflect a ray of the spiritual sun.

The Baha’i Nineteen-Day Feast—when the local Baha’i community meets for worship, consultation, and fellowship—takes place at the beginning of each of the 19 Baha’i months. The Feast begins with devotions, is followed by consultation on community affairs, and ends with food and fellowship. The devotional portion has a spiritualizing effect; passages from the Baha’i Writings and prayers are read. Consultation takes place in a forum similar to a town hall meeting, but conducted with civility and respect. The purpose of consultation is to reach consensus. Consensus is not always possible, but a recommendation may be conveyed to the Local Spiritual Assembly (LSA) by way of a majority vote; even individual suggestions may be passed on to the LSA for consideration. Ideally, the LSA's decisions on prior Feast recommendations should be reported back to the community at a later Feast, both as a courtesy and as evidence of the importance the LSA places upon the consultative process. Finally, the community shares food with the goal of refreshing and further uniting the local community.

Further Information

Christopher Buck and J. Gordon Melton, "Baha’i Calendar and Rhythms of Worship," in Religious Celebrations: An Encyclopedia of Holidays, Festivals, Solemn Observances, and Spiritual Commemorations, ed. J. Gordon Melton (Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-CLIO, 2011), Vol. I, pp. 79–86.

Christopher Buck, "Nineteen-Day Feast (Baha’i)," in Religious Celebrations: An Encyclopedia of Holidays, Festivals, Solemn Observances, and Spiritual Commemorations, ed. J. Gordon Melton (Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-CLIO, 2011), Vol. 2, pp. 641–645.

Gerald Keil, Time and the Bahá’í Era: A Study of the Badí‘ Calendar (Oxford: George Ronald, 2008).

Edward M. Reingold, and Nachum Dershowitz, "The Bahá’í Calendar," in Calendrical Calculations: The Millennium Edition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), pp. 223–231.

Nader Saiedi, Gate of the Heart: Understanding the Writings of the Báb (Ottawa, Ont.: Association for Baha’i Studies and Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 2008).

Entry Author: Buck, Christopher.

________________________________
Excerpt from:

Baha'i Faith: A Quick Reference
Christopher Buck
Copyright 2016 Facts On File. All rights reserved.

Summary

One of the world's youngest and fastest-growing religions, the Baha'i Faith's adherents believe there is one infinite God who sent divine messengers—including the founders of all the major world religions—to teach people about God and to help move humanity toward greater truths. Baha'i Faith: A Quick Reference covers all the basic information about the religion in an accessible A–Z format. This useful guide comes complete with full-color photographs, a timeline, and further readings for each entry to aid research.

About the Author(s)

Christopher Buck, Ph.D., is the author of God & Apple Pie: Religious Myths and Visions of America. An independent scholar, attorney, and former university professor, Dr. Buck has published numerous articles, essays, and books in religious studies, Baha'i studies, Islamic studies, African-American studies, and Native American studies.

Table of Contents
Cover
Copyright
Introduction
Entries
‘Abdu’l-Baha
Bab, The
Baha'i Administrative Order
Baha’i calendar
Baha'i community life
Baha'i eschatology
Baha'i ethics
Baha’i houses of worship
Baha'i laws
Baha'i prayer
Baha'i principles of unity
Baha'i Writings
Baha'u'llah
Table of Contents
Cover
Copyright
Introduction
Entries
‘Abdu’l-Baha
Bab, The
Baha'i Administrative Order
Baha’i calendar
Baha'i community life
Baha'i eschatology
Baha'i ethics
Baha’i houses of worship
Baha'i laws
Baha'i prayer
Baha'i principles of unity
Baha'i Writings
Baha'u'llah
Book of Certitude
Declaration of the Bab, Festival of the
God in Baha'i Faith
Hidden Words, The
Naw-Ruz
persecution of Baha’is in contemporary Iran
Ridvan, Festival of
Shoghi Effendi
Shrine of Baha'u'llah
Shrine of the Bab
Twin Birthdays, Festival of the
Universal House of Justice
Support Materials
Timeline
About the Author

Διὰ τὴν ἑβραϊκὴν ἐπὶ τοῦ Κυρίου παρασημείωσιν ταῦτα λεκτέον. Δέκα ὀνόμασι παρ' Ἑβραίοις ὀνομάζεται ὁ Θεός:

Για την εβραϊκή περιθωριακή σημείωση αναφορικά με το «Κύριος» θα πρέπει να λεχθούν τα εξής. Με δέκα ονόματα από τους Εβραίους ονομάζεται ο Θεός:

Regarding the Hebrew marginal note on "Lord" should be said the following. With ten names is named God by the Hebrews:

01. Αδωναῒ [אדני]
02. Ιά [יה]
03. το Τετραγράμματο [יהוה]
04. Ηλ [אל]
05. Ελωείμ [אלהים‬]
06. Αδών [אדון]
07. Σαβαώθ [צבאות‬]
08. Σαδδαΐ [שדי]
09. Αἰϊὲ [אהיה]
10. {Αἰϊὲ} ἐσεριὲ [אהיה אשר אהיה ?]

>> «ο ειρμός των πέντε γραμμάτων», το Πενταγράμματο: יהשוה

Αναφορά:
Βασιλειάδης, Παύλος (2018). «Απόδοση στα Νέα Ελληνικά του Σχολίου του Ευάγριου Ποντικού σχετικά με το ΠΙΠΙ [יהוה]». Academia, 27 Μαρτίου 2018.

Already has been discussed here:
https://www.academia.edu/s/366b2dd66d/vasileiadis-pavlos-academia-201803-evagrius-in-pipi

This essay examines historically how theologians have employed 'authority' language with reference to the Trinity, in light of certain modern accounts that wish to posit relations of authority within the Trinity. First, it is shown how the contemplative approach to the divine names developed by Thomas Aquinas leads to a cautious and delimited use of 'authority' language with reference to the Trinity. This approach is then set alongside the distinction between theology and economy used by 16th and 17th century Protestant divines in relation to Christology. In conclusion, these contemplative and scholastic modes of discourse are commended over their modern rivals as more exegetically circumspect.