Podcasts about neoplatonist

How does one interpret the hidden meaning of a pagan myth? Some wise Platonist pagan authors help us to understand this, since they explained it in plain writing. One such author is Sallust aka Sallustius the neoplatonist, others include Emperor Julian and Plotinus. In this video I look at how Sallust's writing on the gods and the cosmos help us to understand not only myth, but also the meaning of rites and sacrifices and why they are so important for pagans. Originally recorded January 2019.This podcast depends on your support:Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/survivethejiveSubscribeStar: https://www.subscribestar.com/survive-the-jiveTelegram: https://t.me/survivethejive

Gregory Shaw joins Edge of Mind with a rare and insightful glimpse into the profound wisdom traditions of Western esotericism. Too often, spiritual seekers in the West feel they must look to the East to find depth and authenticity in their practices. However, this dialogue between Andrew and Gregory powerfully demonstrates the richness and relevance of the Neoplatonist and theurgic lineages that are foundational to the Western philosophical and mystical canon.Listeners will be captivated by the scholar's ability to draw parallels between these ancient Greek teachings and the transformative practices of Eastern tantra. Concepts like alignment, embodiment, and the role of the "daimon" or divine presence within the soul are explored with nuance and clarity. This cross-pollination of ideas not only expands one's understanding of both traditions, but also points the way towards an integrative spirituality that can help address the fragmentation and disconnection so pervasive in the modern world.Whether one is already steeped in Neoplatonism or new to this rich vein of Western esotericism, this podcast offers a rare opportunity to learn from two brilliant thinkers who are deeply immersed in these lineages. The discussion is sure to inspire listeners to delve deeper into the wisdom that has been present in their own cultural heritage all along, waiting to be rediscovered and brought to life.

Host of the Creative Codex podcast, MjDorian returns! Video version here (don't forget to subscribe

References Plotinus. 204-270. ""Neoplatonist philosophy:The Enneads Kant, I. 1790. Critique of Judgment. Beatles. 1969. Abbey Road. https://youtu.be/oolpPmuK2I8?si=BKTiNJmp-omJ8lJH Aleotti, V. 1575-1620. Audivi vocem de caelo https://youtu.be/CaTNXjzQANs?si=Zh3whogggigHmp4i --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/dr-daniel-j-guerra/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/dr-daniel-j-guerra/support

Hypatia of Alexandria; A renowned mathematician and Neoplatonist philosopher in ancient Alexandria, known for her contributions to astronomy, mathematics, and philosophy.

This week Jared Morningstar joins me for some metaphysical musings... Oh yeah, it's nerdy all right! What would happen if a process philosopher walked into a bar with a Neoplatonist? I'm not entirely sure, to be honest... but maybe it could look something like this? Enjoy! Resources: JaredMorningstar.com Center For Process Studies

#hecate #hekate #paganism Who is the Greek Goddess Hekate? CONNECT & SUPPORT

In this second part in our series about Shia Islam, we explore the esoteric Isma'ilis, their history and Neoplatonist-influenced theology.Thanks to Dr. Khalil Andani for the help. Check out his channel here:https://www.youtube.com/@KhalilAndaniSources/Recomended Reading:Amir-Moezzi, Mohammad Ali (1994). "The Divine Guide in Early Shi'ism: The Sources of Esotericism in Islam". Translated by David Streight. State University of New York Press.Amir-Moezzi, Mohammad Ali (2011). "The Spirituality of Shi'i Islam: Beliefs and Practices". I.B. Tauris.Andani, Khalil (Forthcoming). "The Moden Resurrection of Nizari Ismaili Islam: The Reforms of the Aga Khans". In "The Oxford Handbook of Islamic Reform" (ed. Emad Hamdeh & Natana Delong-Bas). Forthcoming. Badakhchani, S. Jalal (Edited and Translated by) (2005). "The Paradise of Submission: A Medieval Treatise on Ismaili Thought". A New Persian Edition and English Translation of Tusi's Rawda-yi Taslim". The Institute of Isma'ili Studies. I.B. Tauris.Daftary, Farhad (2007). "The Isma'ilis: Their history and doctrines". Cambridge University Press.Haider, Najam (2014). "Shi'i Islam: An Introduction". Cambridge University Press.Ormsby, Eric (Translated by) (2012). "Between Reason and Revelation: Twin wisdoms reconciled". An annotated English translation of Nasir-i Khusraw's Kitab-i Jami al-hikmatayn. The Institute of Isma'ili Studies. I.B. Tauris.Virani, Shafique N. (2020). "Hierohistory in Qadi l-Nu'man's Foundation of Symbolic Interpretation (Asas al-Taw'il): the Birth of Jesus". In "Studies in Islamic Historiography (Edited by Sami G. Massoud). Brill.A good source for Isma'ilism is also Isma'ili Gnosis: https://ismailignosis.com/#Islam #ismaili #esoteric Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In Technic and Magic: The Reconstruction of Reality, the philosopher Frederico Campagna argues that we moderns have exhausted the reality system we devised at the dawn of our age, a system he calls Technic. Technic has one goal: to reduce all things to language by naming, tagging, measuring, and quantifying them, by turning every parcel of the physical and psychic universe into a "unit" defined by its position in the system. The result has been an erasure of the mere "suchness" of things, the singularity of things simply existing as they are. To replace a worldview that is now revealing its endemic nihilism, Campagna proposes Magic, a way of seeing that reestablishes a balance between the measurable and the ineffable. JF and Phil discuss Campagna's magisterial performance in this episode. Listen to volume 1 (https://pierre-yvesmartel.bandcamp.com/album/weird-studies-music-from-the-podcast-vol-1) and volume 2 (https://pierre-yvesmartel.bandcamp.com/album/weird-studies-music-from-the-podcast-vol-2) of the Weird Studies soundtrack by Pierre-Yves Martel (https://www.pymartel.com) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/weirdstudies) Find us on Discord (https://discord.com/invite/Jw22CHfGwp) Get the new T-shirt design from Cotton Bureau (https://cottonbureau.com/products/can-o-content#/13435958/tee-men-standard-tee-vintage-black-tri-blend-s)! Get your Weird Studies merchandise (https://www.redbubble.com/people/Weird-Studies/shop?asc=u) (t-shirts, coffee mugs, etc.) Visit the Weird Studies Bookshop (https://bookshop.org/shop/weirdstudies) SHOW NOTES Federico Campagna, Technic and Magic (https://bookshop.org/p/books/technic-and-magic-the-reconstruction-of-reality-federico-campagna/11119682?ean=9781350044029) Bill Hicks, “Bit on Marketing” Fredric Jameson, The Seeds of Time (https://bookshop.org/p/books/the-seeds-of-time-revised-fredric-jameson/12858510?ean=9780231080590) Plotinus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plotinus), Neoplatonist philosopher Francis Bacon (https://www.francis-bacon.com/art), Irish artist Samuel Beckett (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Beckett), Irish author William S. Burroughs, Naked Lunch (https://bookshop.org/p/books/naked-lunch-the-restored-text-william-s-burroughs-jr/12459684?ean=9780802122070) Weird Stuides, Episode 87 on Arthur Machen (https://www.weirdstudies.com/87) Northrop Frye, Anatomy of Criticism (https://bookshop.org/p/books/anatomy-of-criticism-four-essays-northrop-frye/10424454?ean=9780691202563)

Cold read + thoughts of a blog post on pre-Christian origins of Marxism. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

Scripture Reading: John 1:6-39I tried to put together a verse-by-verse explanation of verses 6 through 18. That should create a solid foundation for us to simply read, understand, and enjoy verses 19 to 39. 6 A man came, sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness to testify about the light, so that everyone might believe through him. 8 He himself was not the light, but he came to testify about the light.The prologue is emphatic in contrasting John the Baptist and Jesus. Maybe John the Apostle was trying to settle a polemic stirred up by the Baptist's followers. (The contrast includes testifying about the light versus being the light, water baptism versus spirit baptism, witness versus the messiah.)“Witness” was a legal term, although it was also used more generally. In the Septuagint, the term often appeals to objective evidence and is associated with controversy imagery. Consider John 5:31-35:31 “If I testify about myself, my testimony is not true. 32 There is another who testifies about me, and I know the testimony he testifies about me is true. 33 You have sent to John, and he has testified to the truth. 34 (I do not accept human testimony, but I say this so that you may be saved.) 35 He was a lamp that was burning and shining, and you wanted to rejoice greatly for a short time in his light.The Baptist came that “everyone” might believe. Who is “everyone”? The context may limit “everyone” to Jewish contemporaries. Or does it refer to the general offer of the Gospel that is set in motion? The Baptist fulfills the role prophesied in Malachi 3:1: “I am about to send my messenger, who will clear the way before me. Indeed, the Lord you are seeking will suddenly come to his temple, and the messenger of the covenant, whom you long for, is certainly coming,” says the Lord of Heaven's Armies. Consider the relation between revelation and the witness to revelation. God is revealed by Jesus. Jesus is witnessed by the Baptist and his disciples. Then Jesus becomes invisible again and his witnesses become the community of believers.9 The true light, who gives light to everyone, was coming into the world.John the Baptist was a lamp (5:35). Jesus was the light itself. Greek philosophers applied “enlightenment” to the revealing of knowledge; Jewish tradition applied it to the revelation of moral truth (i.e., the Torah and then the Gospel).Jesus gives light to “everyone.” Who is “everyone”? This may parallel a widespread and early Jewish tradition that God made the Torah available to all nations at a specific time at Mount Sinai (although only Israel accepted the truth).10 He was in the world, and the world was created by him, but the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to what was his own, but his own people did not receive him.Jesus was in the world (present participle). Scholars and many church fathers applied the phrase to various manifestations of the Word previous to the incarnation.Jesus created the world but the world did not recognize him. The world belongs to Jesus, but the world “did not receive him,” which John uses elsewhere in his gospel to connote deliberate rejection. There seems to be two stages. First, the world does not recognize the Lord as he takes on flesh. However, once the world recognizes the master has come, then the world deliberately rejects Jesus. Or perhaps the world refers to the gentiles and “his own” refers to the Jewish people. The world did not know Jesus, but the Jews rejected Him. Jewish tradition remarked that the Torah had been offered to all nations but only Israel had accepted it. That certainly was not the case with Jesus.12 But to all who have received him—those who believe in his name—he has given the right to become God's children—Craig Keener points out “‘Receiving' the Jesus of [John's Gospel] embraces the mystery of God's power revealed in weakness and submitting to the revealing Lord of the universe regardless of the cost.”Believing in Jesus' “name” is probably an allusion to the divine name, which in turn is a stand-in for God. This means that trusting in Jesus implies trusting in him as deity. Throughout John's gospel we see that Jesus followers are to believe in Jesus' name, receive life in his name, and expect to suffer for his name.Greeks may have considered God as a father of humanity by virtue of creation. Jews had a much more intimate conception of God's fatherhood towards them as the chosen people. Believers in Jesus assume the covenant role granted Israel as a people. Notice believers receive the right (which could also be translated as “authority”)! Believers have the authority to claim something that no human effort could accomplish. That is incredible language. 13 children not born by human parents or by human desire or a husband's decision, but by God.Consider John 3:1-6:1 Now a certain man, a Pharisee named Nicodemus, who was a member of the Jewish ruling council, 2 came to Jesus at night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs that you do unless God is with him.” 3 Jesus replied, “I tell you the solemn truth, unless a person is born from above, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” 4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter his mother's womb and be born a second time, can he?”5 Jesus answered, “I tell you the solemn truth, unless a person is born of water and spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit.Notice the distinction between genetic Israel and children born of God by belief in His Name.14 Now the Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We saw his glory—the glory of the one and only, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father.The stoics believed God was not of human shape, the Platonist spoke of an unnamed and unseen intellect, and the Neoplatonist denied that wisdom could be seen through a body. But John states that the Word became flesh—fully. Not in a temporary or partial way.To take up residence is to “tabernacle”—like God did in the Old Testament. Remember Exodus 25:8:Let them make for me a sanctuary, so that I may live among them.Most importantly, consider how John 1:14-18 fulfills Exodus 33-34:(1) In Exodus, God gives Torah from Mount Sinai. In John, as prophesied (Isaiah 46:13), the redeemer comes from Zion.(2) In Exodus, the Torah is given to the people. In John, the Logos tabernacles among the people.(3) In Exodus, Moses beholds God. In John, the eyewitnesses (e.g., John the Baptist and the Disciples) behold Jesus.The story of Moses, the highest Jewish figure, culminates in the story of Jesus.As a reminder, here are the relevant portions of Exodus 33-34Exodus 3312 Moses said to the Lord, “See, you have been saying to me, ‘Bring this people up,' but you have not let me know whom you will send with me. But you said, ‘I know you by name, and also you have found favor in my sight.' 13 Now if I have found favor in your sight, show me your way, that I may know you, that I may continue to find favor in your sight. And see that this nation is your people.”18 And Moses said, “Show me your glory.”19 And the Lord said, “I will make all my goodness pass before your face, and I will proclaim the LORD by name before you; I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious; I will show mercy to whom I will show mercy.” 20 But he added, “You cannot see my face, for no one can see me and live.” 21 The LORD said, “Here is a place by me; you will station yourself on a rock. 22 When my glory passes by, I will put you in a cleft in the rock and will cover you with my hand while I pass by. 23 Then I will take away my hand, and you will see my back, but my face must not be seen.”Exodus 343 No one is to come up with you; do not let anyone be seen anywhere on the mountain; not even the flocks or the herds may graze in front of that mountain.” 4 So Moses cut out two tablets of stone like the first; early in the morning he went up to Mount Sinai, just as the LORD had commanded him, and he took in his hand the two tablets of stone.5 The LORD descended in the cloud and stood with him there and proclaimed the LORD by name. 6 The LORD passed by before him and proclaimed: “The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, and abounding in loyal love and faithfulness, 7 keeping loyal love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin. But he by no means leaves the guilty unpunished, responding to the transgression of fathers by dealing with children and children's children, to the third and fourth generation.”8 Moses quickly bowed to the ground and worshiped 9 and said, “If now I have found favor in your sight, O Lord, let my Lord go among us, for we are a stiff-necked people; pardon our iniquity and our sin, and take us for your inheritance.”10 He said, “See, I am going to make a covenant before all your people. I will do wonders such as have not been done in all the earth, nor in any nation. All the people among whom you live will see the work of the LORD, for it is a fearful thing that I am doing with you.29 Now when Moses came down from Mount Sinai with the two tablets of the testimony in his hand—when he came down from the mountain, Moses did not know that the skin of his face shone while he talked with him. 30 When Aaron and all the Israelites saw Moses, the skin of his face shone, and they were afraid to approach him.33 When Moses finished speaking with them, he would put a veil on his face. 34 But when Moses went in before the Lord to speak with him, he would remove the veil until he came out. Then he would come out and tell the Israelites what he had been commanded. 35 When the Israelites would see the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses' face shone, Moses would put the veil on his face again, until he went in to speak with the Lord.What is “glory”? It is a revelation of God's character. Jesus revealed his glory in ways obscure to the elite but visible to those who believed in Him. Consider 1 Corinthians 1:18:18 For the message about the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.Monogenous (μονογενοῦς) is difficult to translate into English. Some translate it as “one and only” and some as “only begotten.” In the Septuagint and other contemporary Jewish writings, the term applies to an only child but it also applies to other unique things (most significantly, to divine Wisdom). To the extent the term means an only child, it connotes “beloved.” A Jewish family with only one son would depend on him for the preservation of the family. To say someone was an “only son” was to say he was extremely important and beloved. Christians are called God's children, but Jesus is the special, beloved, one-of-a-kind Son.15 John testified about him and shouted out, “This one was the one about whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is greater than I am, because he existed before me.'”John's public ministry preceded Jesus' ministry, but Jesus outranked John because Jesus preexisted John. Jesus was not a disciple of John—quite the opposite. Indeed, Jesus was greater than Abraham, “I tell you the solemn truth, before Abraham came into existence, I am!” (John 8:58)16 For we have all received from his fullness one gracious gift after another. 17 For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ.What does grace and truth mean? Remember Exodus 34. Verse 6 says that “[t]he LORD passed by before [Moses] and proclaimed: ‘The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, and abounding in loyal love and faithfulness . . . .” Grace points us to God's “loyal love,” which can also be translated as “covenant-love.” As I pointed out above, truth points us to God's moral truth and faithfulness. When God revealed his grace and truth at Mount Sinai, it was incomplete. Moses only saw part. That revelation becomes complete in Christ. As Craig Keener points out:“Christ is the full embodiment of Torah, completing what was partial (but actually present) in Torah. Jesus Christ thus embodies the hope of Judaism. John does not encourage his community to forsake its Jewish past, but to recognize that in following Christ, the embodiment of Torah, his community fulfills the highest demands of Judaism.”Christ is the full embodiment of the law, the actual model of lived-out commandments, in flesh. The contrast between law and Christ is not between something bad and something good, but between something good and something better.In the first century, “grace” (charis) generally involved a patron-client relation. It involved the giving of an undeserved benefit but also a lasting relationship. Entering into a patron-client relationship was not a light commitment. The client was expected to show respect and gratitude, and the patron was to protect the client's economic, social, and legal interests.18 No one has ever seen God. The only one, himself God, who is in closest fellowship with the Father, has made God known.The Lord told Moses, “You cannot see my face, for no one can see me and live.” But people beheld Jesus, who was God. Consider what Jesus did, as Philippians 2:6-8 says:6 who, though he existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped,7 but emptied himself by taking on the form of a slave, by looking like other men, and by sharing in human nature. 8 He humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death—even death on a cross!Moses beheld a part of God's glory, and Moses' face shone. Christ is that light itself.The rest of John's Gospel maintains the Father's invisibility but qualifies it, for anyone who has seen the incarnate God who has fully revealed the character of the Father has seen the Father. Although blasphemous to the Jewish audience, John's claim is that one who saw Jesus saw a fuller picture of God than Moses did. For Jesus to make God known implies more than communicating a visual image; it suggests that Jesus fully interprets God's character.The Testimony of John the Baptist19 Now this was John's testimony when the Jewish leaders sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?” 20 He confessed—he did not deny but confessed—“I am not the Christ!” 21 So they asked him, “Then who are you? Are you Elijah?” He said, “I am not!” “Are you the Prophet?” He answered, “No!” 22 Then they said to him, “Who are you? Tell us so that we can give an answer to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?”23 John said, “I am the voice of one shouting in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way for the Lord,' as the prophet Isaiah said.” 24 (Now they had been sent from the Pharisees.) 25 So they asked John, “Why then are you baptizing if you are not the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?”26 John answered them, “I baptize with water. Among you stands one whom you do not recognize, 27 who is coming after me. I am not worthy to untie the strap of his sandal!” 28 These things happened in Bethany across the Jordan River where John was baptizing.29 On the next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! 30 This is the one about whom I said, ‘After me comes a man who is greater than I am, because he existed before me.' 31 I did not recognize him, but I came baptizing with water so that he could be revealed to Israel.”32 Then John testified, “I saw the Spirit descending like a dove from heaven, and it remained on him. 33 And I did not recognize him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘The one on whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining—this is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.' 34 I have both seen and testified that this man is the Chosen One of God.”35 Again the next day John was standing there with two of his disciples. 36 Gazing at Jesus as he walked by, he said, “Look, the Lamb of God!” 37 When John's two disciples heard him say this, they followed Jesus. 38 Jesus turned around and saw them following and said to them, “What do you want?” So they said to him, “Rabbi” (which is translated Teacher), “where are you staying?” 39 Jesus answered, “Come and you will see.” So they came and saw where he was staying, and they stayed with him that day. Now it was about four o'clock in the afternoon.Session Recording

Please welcome my guest of this week, scholar and visual artist Sasha Chaitow who takes us on a journey to France during the 2nd half of the 19th century where quite a few mesmerizing persona of the occult revival era can be found, Gérard Encausse (“Papus”), Stanislas de Guaita and also the main protagonist of our episode, almost forgotten Joséphin Péladan. Sasha studied art, communication and English literature in Athens and after completing her Master in Western Esotericism at the University of Exeter she did her PhD on Joséphin Péladan. Actually it was her interest in French symbolism that got her the idea to do some research on Péladan who was a prolific author with more than 100 books and influenced artists and writers of his time alike. Luckily for us all, Sasha's book on Péladan based on her PhD will be published by Theion Publishing late June or July this year and Péladan as a colourful and controversial figure as well as his work will be the main topic of our conversation. We will be talking about Péladan and his role as part of the occult revival and Sasha will point out what was different about him compared to his fellow occultists back then and how he soon found himself at odds with his colleagues due to his clear vision to de-occult occultism itself. From the Theion Publishing website (www.theionpublishing.com) With great joy we announce the forthcoming publication of Son of Prometheus by Sasha Chaitow. Based on her PhD thesis this ground-breaking in-depth study of the life and works of French esotericist Joséphin Péladan will precede her trilogy on Peladan's esoteric work and art to be released by Theion in the coming years. This book is the first scholarly study of the life and work of Joséphin Péladan that succeeds in placing it in the context of the history of Western Esotericism while also providing a clear roadmap to the entirety of Péladan's initiatory teachings and philosophy of the esoteric power of art. Responding to multiple cultural shifts in fin-de-siècle French society, Péladan authored over a hundred novels and monographs in an attempt to bring about the spiritual regeneration of society through mythopoetic art underpinned by esoteric thought. Sasha will explain how Péladan was viewed as ‘difficult' and ridiculed during his lifetime getting bad publicity. Although some fellow occultists such as Papus seemed to understand him, others like Oswald Wirth strongly opposed him and Aleister Crowley borrowed some of his ideas but at the same time wrote negatively about him. While he was almost forgotten and only briefly mentioned here and there, certain mid-20th-century Martinist and Rosicrucian groups claimed his work in order to establish their lineages. On our journey Sasha will be our guide not only through the maze of French occult societies but also through Péladan's worldview which was Neoplatonist in essence as he believed that the Late Antiquity split between religion and occultism had led to paradoxes and misunderstandings. We will also talk about the connection between Péladan and Stanislas de Guaita as Péladan acted as a mentor to de Guaita and was introduced by him to certain occult circles in the late 1880s. Eventually the two of them decided to create an initiatory Hermetic school organised in a quasi-Masonic style ultimately leading to the founding of the Cabbalistic Order of the Rosicrucian as well as to a front-page occult war in the newspapers. Sasha will give us wonderful insights into Péladan's ideas in detail and all the influences that merged within his work and point out several great projects that should be subject to further research. Furthermore, she will offer excellent advice on how anyone interested in Péladan's concepts could start out working with them as a system for self-initiation.

We plummet deep into the fundamental nature of reality in this episode, examining the necessary association of magick with evil: the premise of John Milton's Paradise Lost; Satan and the possible origin of evil; Satan as the archetype of the rebel; our relationship as magicians to this archetype; the absence of a moral framework from magick; the suggestion that magick needs to be kept "evil"; understanding evil in contrast to the good; Neoplatonist approaches to the good; the good as the aspiration of all beings; the misidentification of the good; the Platonic ideals as a guide to goodness; beauty, truth, goodness, and the One (wholeness); Proclus on the separation of being and goodness; wholeness as better than goodness; wholeness as the mystical state, as union with goodness; evil as a consequence of the separation of being from the good; evil as a characteristic of wholeness; evil as a consequence of the actions of beings versus evil as transcendent; Satan as the origin of evil versus Satan as a participant in evil; evil as an attribute of the Divine; the relationship of the Divine to goodness; a Divine wholly good as necessarily imperfect; evil as a bug versus evil as a feature; Nishida Kitaro on the self-negation of the Divine; how the Divine by its nature contradicts itself; Satan as the pawn of God; how Milton glosses over the evil in God; the perfect as perfect only if it includes the imperfect; Nishida's ideas as observations, not theories; the experience of emptiness as the experience of the self-negation of the Divine; how emptiness gives rise to form by standing in a relationship of self-negation to itself; how we have no relationship to the Divine; Creation proceeding not from any relationship to the Divine but by the Divine negating itself; the Heart Sutra and the nature of the Divine; (summary and an emergence from the metaphysical deep-end); Lionel Snell on art, science, religion and magick, and their corresponding principles of beauty, truth, goodness, and wholeness; magick as the aspiration to wholeness rather than to goodness; how magick rejects only the principle of rejection itself; how and why magick rejects neither untruth nor evil; how magick necessarily has a relationship to evil, yet not necessarily an answer to it; the mystery and elusiveness of evil; evil as unfixable, as the universe operating as designed; Jung on Job: humanity as morally superior to the Divine; Christ (God in human form) as the epitome of morality; accepting our moral superiority to God as a magician's response to evil; how there is no escape from evil or morality. Ramsey Dukes (2000). SSOTBME Revised: An Essay on Magic. El-Cheapo. Carl Gustav Jung (2002). Answer to Job. New York: Routledge. Nishida Kitaro (1987). Last Writings: Nothingness and the Religious Worldview. Honolulu: University of Hawaii. John Milton (2008). Paradise Lost. New York: Modern Library. Proclus (2017). The Elements of Theology, translated by Juan and Maria Balboa, https://tinyurl.com/73bxtxsd (archive.org).

Jeffrey S. Kupperman is a Neoplatonist, independent researcher and author of Living Theurgy: A Course in Iamblichus' Philosophy, Theology and Theurgy. In this episode we discuss Neoplatonism, the work of Iamblichus, the practical side of philosophy and more... Kupperman's book can be purchased direct from Avalonia Publishing here: https://www.avaloniabooks.com/product-page/living-theurgy-by-jeffrey-s-kupperman Become part of the Hermitix community: Hermitix Twitter - https://twitter.com/Hermitixpodcast Hermitix Discord - https://discord.gg/63yWMrG Support Hermitix: Hermitix Subscription - https://hermitix.net/subscribe/ Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/hermitix Donations: - https://www.paypal.me/hermitixpod Hermitix Merchandise - http://teespring.com/stores/hermitix-2 Bitcoin Donation Address: 3LAGEKBXEuE2pgc4oubExGTWtrKPuXDDLK Ethereum Donation Address: 0xfd2bbe86d6070004b9Cbf682aB2F25170046A99

Jeffrey S. Kupperman is a Neoplatonist, independent researcher and author of Living Theurgy: A Course in Iamblichus' Philosophy, Theology and Theurgy. In this episode we discuss Neoplatonism, the work of Iamblichus, the practical side of philosophy and more... Kupperman's book can be purchased direct from Avalonia Publishing here: https://www.avaloniabooks.com/product-page/living-theurgy-by-jeffrey-s-kupperman Become part of the Hermitix community: Hermitix Twitter - https://twitter.com/Hermitixpodcast Hermitix Discord - https://discord.gg/63yWMrG Support Hermitix: Hermitix Subscription - https://hermitix.net/subscribe/ Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/hermitix Donations: - https://www.paypal.me/hermitixpod Hermitix Merchandise - http://teespring.com/stores/hermitix-2 Bitcoin Donation Address: 3LAGEKBXEuE2pgc4oubExGTWtrKPuXDDLK Ethereum Donation Address: 0xfd2bbe86d6070004b9Cbf682aB2F25170046A99

Ambrose of Milan (ca. 337-397) was one of the great fourth-century doctors of the Church. In this episode we briefly review his life, achievements and the significance of his contribution for Catholic Christians today.   Ambrose was a Catholic bishop in Milan, Italy.  He is most remembered for his involvement in the conversion of Augustine of Hippo (ca. 354-430). In his Confessions, Augustine relates that a key step in his conversion to Catholicism involved a trip to the Basilica in Milan to hear Ambrose preach. In the sermon, Augustine heard Ambrose utilizing the allegorical method of interpretation, inviting listeners to see the deeper meaning of the various stories recorded in the Old Testament. So captivated was Augustine by this experience that he began to rethink his earlier aversion to the Scriptures. This shift which began in Milan eventually culminated in his baptism at the hands of Ambrose.   In this episode we talk about Ambrose’s use of philosophy and Greco-Roman rhetoric to promote the advancement of the Catholic faith. We give special attention to Ambrose’s use of the Neoplatonist philosophy as a mean for articulating the Christian concept of God. In adopting this course of action, Ambrose was taking his place alongside other earlier Christian Platonists such Origen, Basil of Caesarea and Gregory Nazianzus who had likewise used the Platonist tradition to deepen their understanding of the Christian faith.   We also note Ambrose’s role in opposition to the Emperor Theodosius. Because of his ordering of the slaughter of many Thessalonicans, Ambrose opposed Theodosius’s readmittance into communion until he had done penance for his sin. In taking this action, Ambrose put his own well-being at risk. Theodosius could have easily subjected Ambrose to permanent exile, as was the fate of many fourth-century bishops who became the object of the emperor’s ire. Instead, he opposed the emperor for his spiritual well-being.   Join us this week as we discuss Ambrose’s life and his key contributions to the Catholic faith. You can access this show wherever you download podcasts.   To comment on this show or to provide feedback, please navigate to https://catholicheritagespirituality.com/episode70 The Catholic Heritage Spirituality Show is devoted to helping Catholic Christians better understand the history, teachings and culture of their Catholic faith so that they can better love and serve Christ, the Church and their neighbors. Newsletter Sign-up for the Catholic Heritage Spirituality Show Stay in touch with us! Join our newsletter: https://catholicheritagespirituality.com/podcastnewsletter/ iTunes (click iTunes > Ratings and Reviews > Write a Review)  

The website has a very brief page on African philosophy so this is a short episode.African Philosophy is a disputed term, partly because it is not clear if it refers to philosophies with a specifically African theme or context (such as distinctively African perceptions of time, personhood, etc.), or just any philosophizing carried out by Africans (or even people of African descent).One of the earliest works of political philosophy was the Maxims of the Egyptian official and philosopher Ptah-Hotep as early as the 24th Century B.C. The Egyptian Hellenistic philosopher Plotinus of the 3rd Century B.C. is credited with founding the Neoplatonist school of philosophy.https://www.philosophybasics.com/general_african.htmlAnd as mentioned, I'm going to take just a couple of days off to decide my next route.  This wraps up 5 Minute Philosophy and I hope you enjoyed it.Back soon with another short series and we have two new interviews coming next week as well.Thanks --- Jeff

Ever met a Neoplatonist before the 19th Century? Me neither. The term was cast on a load of figures from the 3rd Century onwards. Using the philosophy of Plato, Neoplatonists came up with a sort of Unified Field Theory for how existence works. Without a doubt one of the most influential philosophies to the world of the esoteric and the occult. But how does it work? What view of the world does it propose? In this Episode, Doug and Dominique get their hands quite dirty going through a philosophy that needs to be looked at a little bit closer.

Ask me anything! Here I answer questions from fans and patrons on the subjects I actually cover on this Podcast: Religion, genetics, history etc. I start with patron questions, and then do superchat questions. Second part of the stream will only be available for patrons on Subscribestar and Patreon. Sign up to support me below. The survive the jive podcast depends on your support:Paypal: https://www.paypal.me/survivethejivePatreon: https://www.patreon.com/survivethejiveSubscribestar: https://subscribestar.com/survive-the...Ko-Fi: https://ko-fi.com/survivethejiveFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/SurviveTheJiveTwitter: https://twitter.com/SurvivetheJive

How does what we know about the changing demographics of Imperial Rome inform our understanding of the rise of Christianity within it, the importance of the Chaldean oracles as a "bible" for neoplatonists and the apparent ignorance of pagan theology displayed by Saint Paul when he delivered a sermon at the Areopagus in Athens? I am going to chat about this in tonight's Jive Talk. The first half hour is public and the second part will be available only for patrons at one of the following two websites:Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/survivethejiveSubscribestar: https://subscribestar.com/survive-the-jiveOther links:Paypal: https://www.paypal.me/survivethejiveFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/SurviveTheJiveTwitter: https://twitter.com/SurvivetheJiveBuy my Xmas book: https://shop.smiletitans.com/product/the-spirit-of-yuleRoman DNA: http://survivethejive.blogspot.com/2019/11/ancient-roman-dna.html

This episode of Stoicism On Fire kicks off an exploration of the powerful, poignant, and perennially inspiring Encheiridion of Epictetus. The fifty-three chapters of this Stoic handbook will provide the primary content and plan for this exploration of Stoic theory and practice. However, I will incorporate other Stoic texts and the insights of scholars where appropriate for the subject at hand. In this introductory episode, I will provide some background on the Encheiridion. Then, in the next episode of Stoicism On Fire, we will begin the chapter-by-chapter exploration with the frequently quoted chapter one. About the Encheiridion Origin and Authorship The Encheiridion, like the Discourses, was written by Flavius Arrian, who was a student of Epictetus and later became a public servant under the Emperor Hadrian, and a respected historian. In a letter to Lucias Gellius, Arrian claims the Discoursesare “word for word” taken “as best I could” from the lectures of Epictetus.[1] The Encheiridion, frequently referred to as the Handbook, is a compilation of passages drawn from those Discourses. As a result, many of the chapters in the Encheiridion can be directly correlated to passages in the Discourses; those that cannot are likely from portions of the Discoursesthat are lost to us. History The Encheiridion, more so than the Discourses, has been the historical gateway into the thought of Epictetus. For example, Simplicius, a sixth-century Neoplatonist, wrote a commentary on the Encheiridion that served as an introduction to Neoplatonist philosophy. Additionally, as Christopher Gill notes in his introduction to the Robin Hard translation of Epictetus, The Handbook was also adopted, with some modifications (including replacing the name of ‘Socrates’ with ‘St Paul’), by Christian monks, and used for centuries by the Eastern (Greek Orthodox) Church. Through Syriac Christian scholars, Epictetus’ thought spread to the Islamic East, influencing, for instance, the teaching on ‘dispelling sorrow’ by al-Kindī, a major figure in the study of Greek texts in ninth-century Baghdad.[2] The fact that the Encheiridion served as the sole source of Epictetus’ teaching for many who are not otherwise interested in Stoicism produced a negative side effect. As W. A. Oldfather, the author of the Loeb Classical Library translations of Epictetus points out, the “necessary aridity and formalism” of this condensed version obscures “the more modest, human, and sympathetic aspects of [Epictetus’] character.”[3] Unfortunately, a compendium like this can easily create misunderstanding and result in unwarranted criticism of Epictetus’ thought. This bring up an excellent point. The Encheiridion is not a substitute for the Discourses of Epictetus. Instead, its passages should serve as reminders for those who are already familiar with Stoic teachings. Purpose According to Simplicius, Arrian wrote a letter to Messalenus that describes the Encheiridion as a “selection” of those passages from the Discourses that are “most timely and essential to philosophy, and which most stir the soul.” Simplicius further suggests: The aim of [the Encheiridion]—if it meets with people who are persuaded by it, and do not merely read it but are actually affected by the speeches and bring them into effect—is to make our soul free, as the Demiurge and Father, its maker and generator, intended it to be: not fearing anything, or distressed at anything, or mastered by anything inferior to it.[4] Because the Encheiridion was created to serve as a handy reminder of Epictetus’ teaching, I waited to address it on the Stoicism In Fire podcast until I covered the essentials of Stoic theory and practice. The Encheiridion is not a standalone text of Stoic doctrine. Instead, it serves to remind us about teachings with which students and practitioners of Stoicism should already be familiar. This podcast series will explore the Encheiridion with that in mind; therefore,

This week I'm joined by the one and only Ty Shaw. We dive deep into our connections with the Orishas and Ty talks us through some of her sexual empowerment work and how they all connect. Her work covers old traditions and new traditions, and her dedication to her practise is inspiring. This is one not to be missed! Connect with Ty through her website.  If you are interested in supporting this podcast though our Patreon you can do so here. If you want more of this in your life you can subscribe by RSS , iTunes, Stitcher, or email. Thanks for listening! If you dig this please subscribe and share with those who would like it. Andrew   transcription  ANDREW: Welcome to another installment of The Hermit's Lamp podcast. I am hanging out today with Ty Shaw, who is a fascinating human being. She practices a bunch of different traditions, and brings a lot of, you know, experience in a lot of different ways through life and spirituality to the conversation today. So, for folks who don't know who you are, Ty, why don't you introduce yourself? What -- Who are you and what are you about? TY: Oh, my god. Ooh child. Well, I am Ty Shaw, like you just said, and what am I about? I'm a Iyalorisa, palera Mambo, and a lot of other things, oh iyanifa, that's the most recent one! Always forget to list that one! ANDREW: Right. TY: And basically, what I have been doing is working with people within the tradition. I was obviously with my spiritual house, and the various, you know, people that I service in my communities, but my sort of day job now is in the space of sacred sexuality coaching, intimacy coaching, and really bringing, particularly, well, people in general, but women in particular, in alignment with sort of their spirituality and their sexuality, and kind of bridging that gap, and working in a space where people understand that when you talk about sacred sexuality that you don't have to look to India or to China or to Japan or to these other places, that we do have concepts of sacred sexuality from an African context ... ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: If you're willing to actually look at what we're doing and examine what we're doing. ANDREW: All right. Well, why don't you enlighten us on that? Because I know, you know, being a babalocha, right, you know? That sex, at least sex in general is very, we keep that inside of the Orisha tradition, you know, not inside of the tradition, but outside of the relationships and the connections there, you know, and people are often like, very slow to even get into conversations like that, because there is such an emphasis on having proper relationships and where those lines are ... TY: Right. ANDREW: So, where does that come from in what your experiences are for you? TY: Well, that's exactly why I do this work. Because our traditions are very conservative in how they look at sex ... ANDREW: Yeah. TY: Which to me, is not only counterproductive but contradictory, because everything we do mimics a sexual act on some level. If we want to take, say the babalawo for example, when the oluwo is pounding ikin, the oluwo is mimicking copulation, such that ikin, or odu, can give birth. When we go into the igbodú and we want to birth a new priest in the process of a kariocha, we are using the leads, singing the songs, doing the invocations ... ANDREW: Sure. TY: To get certain elements to give birth. You know, if we're sitting on the mat and we're divining with the odun and odí falls, or some iteration of oché, or something out of ogunda falls, we're going to be talking some sexual shit. [laughs] You know what I'm saying? ANDREW: I do! TY: Can you talk -- we deal with deities who cover these specific things. And, we deal with energy. We're priests. We understand that, just from a basic scientific perspective, that energy is neither created nor destroyed. It's how it's directed. So that means there is no difference between spiritual energy and sexual energy. And the fact that we vibrate on a different level as priests because we actively cultivate our energy -- we're cultivating our sexuality as well. And I think the fact that our traditions are so conservative, and don't allow for these deeper conversations, even though the liturgy, odu, the deities themselves, do speak of these things and act in these ways, because we haven't had these conversations and developed that language, we have what we see now, which is the manifestation of a plethora of, or an abundance rather, of sexual dysfunction, in an out of ritual in an out of the room, and a community of priests who are manipulating energies, but really have no basic concept of what energy is, how it works, and what you're conjuring. [laughs] So that's why I decided to get in that space. ANDREW: Yeah! So, when you're ... because lots of people who listen to this are not going to be practitioners of ATRs, or, you know, diasporic traditions or those things necessarily, let's pull this apart just a little bit more. Because I know exactly what I think you mean -- I mean, you're going to tell me if I'm right -- but -- I think one of the things that we want to make clear, is that some of the dysfunction that I think that you're talking about, I mean there's obviously the people who are having challenges themselves, which is a separate issue, but then there's the sort of dysfunction of people taking advantage of relationships, godparents, or other people who should be obeying a taboo that is like a parent to a child ... TY: Right. ANDREW: You know, or having relationships and using their power and position to take advantage of people. Right? We're talking about these kinds of things, right? TY: Right. Right. ANDREW: Yeah. TY: Well, one thing about that, we're talking about even in our intermittent relationships, we are seeing a lot of abuse coming to the surface, because of Facebook, sexual abuse, women who are being raped by their babalawo husbands, or men that I've encountered in this tradition who come seeking guidance and were molested by a godparent. You know? We have an abundance of people of color, amongst those people of color are women of color, and I personally in my adult life don't know any women of color who haven't experienced sexual abuse or sexual assault. So, we have this abundance of sort of sexual trauma, that comes up in our relationships in so many different ways, whether it's the baggage we bring to the tradition, or whether it's the abuse of power because of the dynamic within the tradition. But we still because of our conservativism, we don't have that conversation. ANDREW: Right. TY: And when we do, it's an accusatory one: You abused me. You did this. You didn't do booze up the bembé. You tried to take my husband. You know. But we don't necessarily have conversations around what the solutions are. What we're going to do about it. How do you fix them? If you're a babalawo that's married, and you have your apetdabe, how are you cultivating that sacred relationship? ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: Because that's our version of it! [laughs] You know what I'm saying? In a certain way. On a certain level. ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: How are we cultivating our intimate relationships? How does that affect our vibration and our energy and how we cultivate our Ase as priests, and then what does that look like in terms of how do we treat each other in our interpersonal relationships? ANDREW: Sure. And how are we dealing with our own ... I mean, even if we don't have the kinds of traumas you're talking about, you know, we all exist in a culture that, you know, experiences toxic masculinity, and rape culture, and all of these bits and pieces and all sorts of exploitative pieces left over from a long time, in our culture, right? TY: Yes. ANDREW: And how do we look at ourselves and become clear about what is our desire? What is real? How do we communicate? Where does consent fit? TY: Right. ANDREW: You know, all of these things, right? Like these are important pieces ... TY: Yeah. ANDREW: Of cultivating ... Well, I mean, being a decent human being, for one, but like, and certainly being a spiritual human being for another, right? You can't. TY: Yeah. And we can't deal with these forces that again, we're engaging in sort of spiritual sexual acts in the process of giving birth and getting odu to conceive and put something out there that's new, and then appeasing this newborn thing via ebbó. We do these things, but there's a disconnect, there's some sort of cognitive dissonance, you know, between the act and the metaphysical understanding of the act, you know? Mmmhmm. ANDREW: I also think that people don't understand energy, as you kind of said earlier. Right? TY: Yeah, exactly, exactly. ANDREW: You know, one of the things that I noticed when I became a priest was, all sorts of people who started hitting on me who weren't hitting on me before. TY: Yeah, because you were orisha. ANDREW: Right? And I got Shango on my head, right? I mean, that's going to draw some heat, right? And, you know, and the thing is, is that, if I wasn't mindful of it, if some of my elders hadn't said, hey, this is probably going to happen, take it easy about that, then you'd get into all sorts of trouble, right? Because what's going on is those people aren't necessarily attracted to me ... TY: It's that energy! ANDREW: They're feeling that energy, and they want more of that, but we don't understand how to get close to spirit, or how to be intimate with human beings, and not frame that in a sexual context. Right? TY: Or, if it's in a sexual context, that doesn't mean we have to act in a debased way. How about receiving the energy because we are, like Shango is the pillar of virility, male virility, male marknotism, that's his Ase, and it is sexual, there's no way around that. How about we accept that that's what it is, internalize it, and use it for what it does? As opposed to saying, well, I feel arousal, this means I must screw, this means I must ... you know. As opposed to no, these are what vibrations and energy do, and you know that's why I started getting into vibrational medicine, you know, prana, reiki, tantric projection work, because we already have heightened vibrations as a result of having gone through ritual. And ideally, we're cultivating our Ase, cultivating ori, we're developing and uplifting that vibration. But so many priests I would have a conversation with about energy, vibration, how we magnetize it and move, there was just such a lack of understanding, and a lot of times I feel that we're doing ebbó, we're killing chickens, but what you need is a chakra cleanery, what you need is a past life regression, what you need is some spiritual counseling, it's an issue on a base level with your vibration. Which ebbó does address, through the power of sacrifice, but you're still not internalizing that in your vibration. ANDREW: Well, it's like I popped my collar bone out of place, recently, right? And, you know, I went to my osteopath and put it back in place, but the reason I popped it out of place, was cause muscles in my back were out of balance, and that is a physiotherapy thing, and so now I need to be ... you know, and so, and I think that that's true on many levels, right? Spiritual practices can make adjustments ... TY: Mmmhmm. ANDREW: And, in different kinds of spiritual practices, can be that physiotherapy ... TY: Right. ANDREW: But it's rare that one does all of them at the same time, right? You know? It's like you go for a reading with the Orishas, and they're going to, you know, realign your vertebrae, and be like this is where you should be and then you're going to leave, and all those wonky muscles and your habits are going to want to pull you back out of place, right? And whether that's energetic, or your circumstance, or your psychology, or whatever, right? Or the various baggage you're carrying with you? That's all that energy that wants to kind of disalign you again, right? TY: Right. And I think that's one of the major critiques I've had, like if anybody has seen my Facebook videos, I've done a lot of critiquing about what I think is healthy versus what I don't think is healthy, right? ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: And in that sort of process, not understanding energy has led this new generation of people that are kind of coming into the tradition with a level of ... how would I say, like a lack of respect for tradition? And in that process, they stereotype and pigeonhole certain energies because there's a fundamental misunderstanding of energy. So, like for example, I see this wave of new women coming into sacred sexuality, and not everyone's a child of Ochún. Because they think, okay, Ochún, sacred whore, sacred prostitute, no idea where that comes from, but this is what they say, and this is what they think, right? When it's like, Ochún, first of all, it's a stereotyping of this energy, because you don't even understand what you're talking about, it's a pigeonholing and it's a limiting of her, because depending on the road, you might be dealing with the crone, you might be dealing with the witch, you might be dealing with the demure healer, you might be dealing with something like Ochún Ibu Kwanda, the warrior. Who ain't got nothing to do with your coquette. [laughs] ANDREW: Yeah, for sure, right? TY: When people don't understand energy, when we don't understand how things work, and we stereotype, and we pigeonhole, we do everybody a disservice ... ANDREW: Yeah. TY: We don't, we don't get access to the thing, you know, that's really going to ... ANDREW: Yeah, I think that, I think it's challenging, because there's such a profound and sort of largely ... If you're outside of the tradition, largely inaccessible depth and diversity that's there, right? TY: Mmmhmm. ANDREW: You know, how many roads of Ochún are there? How many roads of ... you know? You know, this, that, and all those other spirits, right? TY: Right. ANDREW: And what do those things mean, right? TY: Mmmhmm. ANDREW: And what do ... and what if you're dealing with, I mean, you know, if you're dealing with those, or running into those, or if those are the paths or avatars that are sort of engaging with you, it's completely different to have one versus the other, right? TY: Yeah, right. ANDREW: There's the Yemaya who pulls you down to the bottom of the ocean, right? TY: Yep. ANDREW: And leaves you there! TY: And leave y'all! ANDREW: Right. And then there's those other paths that are going to love you and hold you while you cry and pat your back, right? TY: Oh, there's this my path, Achaba, who's just the shady one, who don't want to ... ANDREW: Yeah. Right? TY: You know. There's koha ibun shade .... ANDREW: [laughs] TY: But I love her, I love her. But that's why, like in my work ... Okay, I had become a palera , I became a iyalosha, I became a mom, though I became a iyanifa, and then I was like, well, why do I want to do any of this? What does this mean to me? What does priesting look like for me? ANDREW: Sure. TY: Do I ... Am I going to be able to do it in the way maybe my elders did it? Do I believe in the same things? What is this priesthood thing going to actually play out for me? And I found that in ... And I'm a young santera, you know what I'm saying, so, I mean, I'm 5 in Ocha this year -- no, I'm six. Am I six already? Shit! But anyway. ANDREW: It's really stacking up, right? [laughter] TY: You know, so I'm a baby olosha. Infant. And, in the process of me coming into adulthood as a nealOrisha, growing up and kind of going through adolescence, now, I have to ... I decided to consciously ... consciously move into priesthood. What is this priesthood thing going to look like for me? Where is going to be my medicine? What's going to be my point of departure? And that has always been whole person healing. What am I dealing with? What is Yamaya bringing to my doorstep? And yes, I can solve this with ebbó, but after ebbó, what is going to -- and that creates transformation -- but what's going to last? What's going to stick? What's going to change behavior? You know? And that's when I decided to go ... that my route was really as a healer ... ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: Getting into the spiritual development of the person, and then when I was trying to figure out well what healing would look like, outside of energy healing and spiritual cleanings and stuff, what I found is, that what people were lacking was the counsel and a way to really work through trauma, particularly trauma held within the body, of a sexual nature. And our tradition was no exception to that. So, it spoke to me of just the niche, that made sense, that I could kind of slide on into, you know? ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: So right now, it sounds like priesting for me is looking like being really woman/Goddess-centered, really witchy, and really focused on long-lasting transformation. ANDREW: Mmm. TY: In or outside of an igbodú or a new set of elekes, or the reception of a new Orisha. ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: [laughs] You know what I'm saying? ANDREW: For sure, because so many, you know, I'm also a relatively young olocha, you know, but lots of people who come around for that part of what I do, they, so many of them almost show up with their shopping list, right? They're like, I'm coming to you, I want you to give me my elekes, please confirm that I'm a child of whomever, you know? And like, and so on, and it's like ... I don't know. Like, you know, let's see what happens, right? Whereas, when people come to me in my sort of card reading and you know, that other magical side of my life ... A lot of those things are more like what I think that all of it should be, which is, let's see what's going on, let's talk about what you need, let's work on this, and make that change so that it endures, right? TY: Right. ANDREW: Because it's so easy to, you know, when I made Ocha, Shango basically said to me, it was like, "Hey, welcome, you're here, so go fix your life, cause you've got some things that are messy that you made, and now you gotta go fix em cause Ocha can't do it," and I was like, "All right. Huh. That's not what I was hoping!" [laughs] TY: Right? ANDREW: You know? TY: Shango has a way of just popping that bubble. He kind of gave me something similar, in my Ita, Shango, he came down talking bout "You do not know how to live, and now you need to learn how to live. Learn how to live in this life, or you'll learn how to live in the other," we hear that refrain. You know? ANDREW: Yeah. TY: And I think I had a similar trajectory, like, I love teaching, you know, cards, crystals, all the airy fairy witchy stuff, because even though I had extensively studied African tradition, I studied traditional forms of witchcraft as well. I was a proper neoPlatonist high ceremonial magic type of witch [laughs] for a ... ANDREW: Yeah. TY: [[00:19:10] astrological magic, like, I came from Bea too, so ain't nobody going to get me to leave my cards behind, and none of that, but ... And I felt like there was space for that. Like there were, you know ... And spiritualism gives you that opportunity, right? To bring in anything you want? But, people would come with their shopping list, well I want this, I want to be crowned tomorrow, I need you to take me to Haiti, and then after that take me to Africa, and I want this and I want that, and usually my attitude is like, that's cute, that's what you want, you know, good for you, you are clear on your desires ... ANDREW: Yeah. TY: Which is ... [laughs] What do you actually need? Now that we've gotten through your laundry list, what's actually getting ready to happen here? ANDREW: Yeah. TY: Cause guess what, I don't move, unless Yamaya tells me this is what has to happen. ANDREW: Oh yeah. For sure. TY: [laughing] ANDREW: That piece of ... I don't know what the right word for it is ... understanding ... that the Orishas that sits on our heads, you know, and live with us, that nothing happens without their say so. Something so largely foreign to most people's concepts, right? You know? TY: Yeah. ANDREW: Like I remember, many years ago, I got this reading, and Aleyo was like, "No tattoos for you this year," and I was like, "huh, all right, fair enough, I'll stop," right? I had a bunch of stuff planned and I stopped. And a lot of people couldn't understand how I could be just like, "okay"? Like what if he never says yes again? And I was like, "Well, that's cool, I'll roll with that." But that's so hard for people to roll with, right? You know and because ... I think in part because we're encouraged to be ego-centered in a way that is hard to wrestle with ... TY: Yes. ANDREW: But also because of all these traumas that we've been talking about, right? TY: Yes. ANDREW: How much harder is it for someone to put that kind of trust in somebody, if they have, you know, whatever kinds of traumatic experiences and abuses from people who should be ... who were supposed to be there facilitating them? Parents, priests, guides, whoever, right? TY: You know, I agree with that, because it's about several things. It's about shifting from a very Western individualist self-absorbed ego-centric way of being and moving through the world, which I'm not even judging, because those are actual tools we need to survive in the West. ANDREW: Sure. TY: [laughs] Okay? A certain amount of selfishness is necessary for your survival in this place. However, it does create a learning gap. Because you kind of have to cross that bridge to understand how everything functions in this particular tradition. And the unique thing about this tradition is that it's not just all this ... I think we also get really idealistic and we think that we have all these proper African values, and we don't. We have diaspora values, because if you rob them [22:09?] of cultural nuances they don't recognize in Africa. They're not doing that. And we have to separate the caricature of Africa that we have, this ideal ... this, you know, ideal, you know, Africa that doesn't exist. What we're dealing with is post-colonial Africa, that has just as much white supremacist misanthropic bullshit as any one of us. ANDREW: Yeah. Well and also, you know, which part of Africa are we talking about, right? You know? Are we talking about ... TY: Thank you! Thank you! ANDREW: Are we talking about, you know, Ifé, are we talking about the Congo, are we talking about wherever, like, you know, I mean ... TY: Right. Right. ANDREW: I know people come in and they're like "well, you know, I was talking to a Sengoma, and that's exactly like what you do," and I'm like, "No, not really," like, in a general way it's animist and whatever, but other than that, no, it's not the same at all, right? TY: Right. And that's a problem. they think of Africa as a monolith, as one like homogenous sort of thing. They don't understand the level of nuance. And this is why I've always battled these faulty notions and assertions of purity in this tradition and who's more pure, who has the right way, who's the closest to the root? And it's like, nobody, because what is properly African is that we've always assimilated, and brought in what works, and transformed and adapted. And if you go to Nigeria right now, what they're doing in Ejife, is not what they're doing in Oyo, is not what they're doing in Abayokuda, is not what they're doing in Oshopo. They're all doing something different! Compound to compound, region to region! Because there's always been sort of that gap to allow for spirit, to allow for adaptability, that's how we learn. ANDREW: Well, and I think that that's the power of lineage, right? You know? TY: Sure. ANDREW: Like, what you're going to do, you can't do anything ... TY: Yeah. ANDREW: But you can do anything that fits within the bounds of your lineage, right? TY: Exactly. ANDREW: And that's the real meaning of, like, oh, in my house we do this, it's like, you know, lots of people use that as a justification for what they don't know or to just do whatever they feel like, or be like, oh, I can't get that, so you know in my house now, now we give turkeys instead of chickens, cause they're easier to get, or whatever, right? And it's not ... that's not valid, right? What's valid is understanding what's going on within your lineage, and then honoring and working with that, because that is something, those are the spirits that we're calling on to work, right? You know, in one way or another. TY: I've always been a bit of a lineage snob. Particularly in this day and age where people feel that they can self-initiate and they can get their head marked via tarot, and they can get initiated online, this, because, the thing about lineage, right, when I ... I try to explain this to new people, it's like if you're a Christian it doesn't mean that you all believe the same thing, you might be a 7th Day Adventist, you might be a Baptist, there are denominations here. And I feel that we've gotten to the point in our traditions where we have denominations, okay? And within each denomination, lineage becomes important because that's going to imply style, technique, and approach. Okay? We may all believe certain things, but how it plays out, how it looks in ritual, our approach to ritual, technique, that's going to be based on lineage. I think Palo is a great example of that. When you tell me the ramen, you tell me the house, now I know what kind of Palo you do. Because that's what lineage dictates. What types of agreements do you have with the forces you have the ability to access and conjure, and what do your ceremonies look like? Because everything outside of ceremony, ritual, and the protocols associated with them, that's what we dictate and what we have a blueprint for. Everything outside of that is between you and your spirit. You got to work that out! And that's why lineage gives you the blueprint, right, for how ritual, what makes you a certain thing, what makes another thing a thing, then outside of that, that's all you, boo! ANDREW: Yeah, for sure, right? ANDREW: It's all about getting to know what your particular Orishas like and want, right, you know? I mean, cause people always want to do big ceremonies, and more often than not, you know, if I cook a little amala ila for Shango, he's gonna eat up and get whatever I want, right? You know? Like, it's easy, once you sit and listen. Once you understand and build that connection. But, you know, but that quest for purity or truth or like, the solution, you know, it's not always bigger and better things, it's learn to work what you have, right? And then apply that and then you can go from there. TY: And insofar as learning to work what you have is concerned, I think that's another challenge, because one of the main critiques I sort of have of our traditions right now is that I don't think people are practicing African tradition or African-inspired tradition. I feel like they're Christians in elekes. Because they kind of bring all their Christianity and dress it up in nice African fabric and put beads on it, but it's still Christianity. ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: And I find that that is especially true with how we understand and approach Orisha. Sometimes our relationship and approach to Orisha is devotional, and sometimes it's not. I'm not always on my knees begging like I'm praying to the Lord, sometimes I'm sending Orisha on a mission, and I think people have forgotten that, and I see that that disconnect comes in mostly since the African American involvement in Orisha tradition. The reason why I say that is because [00:27:56--garbled] coming up with these older Cubans, Puerto Ricans ... I have seen them be like hiding drugs in Ocha, or getting a custom Elegua out cause they want some shit to go down or they busting somebody outta jail, it wasn't this elitist thing, and it wasn't so ... the level of Christianized judgement, and this just pray to Orisha and give agomu, I don't work with Uheria, that's very different, because we have songs, we have liturgy that calls us powerful sorcerers and sorceresses, and how we work with Orisha. I think that we have to reexamine what our relationship is. Is it this Christianized devotion? Or sometimes do you work with Orisha like any other sorcerer in any other tradition? And what are these ideas that we're bringing in that are foreign and counter-productive? Because if you are just purely devotional, right? and you just throw in so that you can appease Orisha and get on your knees, do you really know what that Orisha likes and how it could work for you or how you could get up and make something pop when you need it? Do you really know that? Or do you know how to appease Jesus on Sunday and beg? And does that make you a priest? Or does that make you a slave to some spirit? And you call it Ocha? ANDREW: Mmm. Well. I had the, I think, good fortune, it's one of the best gifts that I think my parents gave me, which was to not be raised with anything. So, religion was nonexistent in my household. Which, you know, I think was tremendously liberating compared to where a lot of people come from when they come into these things, right? And I think that this question of what is, what does it mean to exist with a magical religion, right? TY: Mmmhmm. ANDREW: Is something that is quite different than what a lot of people expect or understand, right? And it's neither as simple, at least in my experience, as "Hey, dude, I was sitting on the couch playing video games all month and I need some like money for rent, hook me up," right? TY: Right. ANDREW: That doesn't necessarily work either, right? I mean, maybe? Maybe the first time, maybe sometimes. Or you know, “bust me out of jail,” or whatever ... TY: Of course, there's spontaneity. Right. ANDREW: But it's also not. TY: Yeah. ANDREW: Not that either, right? You know? And sort of this distinction between the things that we want and need to live in this world and live in this life, right? TY: Uh huh. ANDREW: I mean, they are there to facilitate those things. TY: Right. ANDREW: And -- TY: I think it -- ANDREW: Go ahead. TY: No, no, I'm sorry, go ahead. ANDREW: Well, I was going to say, and, they are there cause they can see how we can free ourselves from the problems we make for ourselves, or the problems other people bring, and sort of move beyond them, or move and minimize them as we go through life, right? Because ... TY: Yes. ANDREW: You know, life is complicated, right? TY: It's the battle of the Osobos and the Iré, right? All these forces of negativity that exist in the world on many levels ... ANDREW: Right. ANDREW: And some of those come from us, too, right? And learning to overcome those ones that are ... Not in a "we're all sinners" kind of way, like we've all got baggage, we've all got tendencies, maybe we're lazy, maybe we're too greedy, maybe we're hateful or whatever, and those things undermine our lives, and we need to ... you know, it's that balance of both, I think, right. TY: Right. ANDREW: Cause literally people come into the shop and "I need you to Santeria somebody," and I'm like, "whatever, “Dude, I don't even know what you mean, but no." Like, forget it? You know? yeah. TY: I see -- I mean, I see your point. I guess what -- not I guess -- one of the things I'm resistant to is elitism in this tradition. ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: Because it has become elitist on a number of levels just because of the price point, the introduction of just the academia, you know, into this? So, there's also an intellectual elitism here ... ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: And with that elitism, there's been sort of this political attempt to Christianize in terms of its values, and what we do, we don't do that, and it's like, um, but we do! Because I remember very distinctly being called for those basement ochas that we had to do in an emergency cause somebody was going to jail, or, you know, [laughs] somebody has some illness, and it was a bunch of poor people in that ocha in a project apartment saving somebody's life. I remember when it wasn't elitist. ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: You know? And there wasn't any shame around doing an obra versus an ebbó. And how I'm distinguishing those terms, when I say an obra, a work, something that you don't throw for, that you go, you put it together, and you tell Orisha, versus ebbó that comes out of a divination and Orisha done told you! ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: I remember that, there being a distinction and watching santeros move in that way. I remember that there wasn't the stigma and the shame around, yo, maybe I do need to come up with my rent cause I'm getting put out of my house and I need to go to Elegua to open a door. ANDREW: Yeah. TY: I remember because there was no stigma around that. ANDREW: Well and, I hope I didn't come across wrong, because I think there should be no shame. Right? We are all where we're at, and we're all in places and life is complex and variable and many things happen, right? TY: Right. ANDREW: And, you know? There are those times when we need to make those things, or to, you know, kick 'em in the pants a little bit and be like, "Elegua, dude, rent's due on the first, it better be in my account before that, my friend, it needs to happen, or we're all in on the street," right? or whatever, and I think there should never be any shame in any of that or in needing healing or, you know. I mean, all of those things, I think that we're all human and we all need those things all the time and we'd be foolish to think that that's not going to be the case, right? But I also do agree that there's a tendency to try and niceify, right? You know? TY: Yep. You say it even more in Nigeria. You see it even more in the Nigerian priests, with this attempt at, you know, Christianizing Ifa because of the onslaught of just attack from Muslim- and Christian-kind in Nigeria. ANDREW: Sure. Right? And you know, and it's ... you see it in a lot of, you know, more fringe places, right, you see it in the LGBT community, right, and all those extra letters too, where, it's like, well, look, we're just like you, we're this way, we're that way, and that's true for some people, and for other people it's not, right? And I think that those kinds of diversity ... it doesn't benefit anybody either to leverage one group down so that we could sort of be up, right? You know in the way that like, historically Palo and Lucumí traditions went through that conflict, right? You know, there's the historical divide, right? TY: Well, still. ANDREW: Well still, but like, you know, there were specific historical events where, you know it was like all of a sudden, well, you know, we'll throw the Palo community under the bus for this ... TY: Yeah. ANDREW: And show how legitimate and good we are, right? TY: And they're still doing it. I was very resistant to making Ocha for a lot of years, because I was palera for a long time before I became an olosha. ANDREW: Yeah. TY: And one of the things that I've [35:39--inaudible]... that I was really resistant about, was what I call Lucumí-, or Yoruba-centric [distortion/inaudible at 00:35:51]. You know, Yorubas tend to posit themselves at the top of this whole priest -- overstep their boundaries, an Orisha priest telling you, you have abatowa crown, get rid of your nganga. How? Why is it you feel that your tradition gives you the right to tell somebody what can and can't happen in a completely separate practice? Okay? And that's your eccentric elitism. That's Lucumí-centric elitism. And we see it because Lucumí is the most expensive initiation, that people feel like once they get crowned they've arrived, honey, they got the big crown ... ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: And it perpetuates this contention. It also perpetuates a lot of misinformation. Like Cholla is not Ochún. She will never be Ochún. Saramanda is not Ogun. Nusera is not Elegua. [laughs] You understand what I'm saying? ANDREW: Yeah. Well and I think it's part of that desire or ignorance that promotes generalization, right? You know? TY: Yes. ANDREW: I mean, it's not 100% true, but I often sort of think, if there's an odu that says you shouldn't do that, then that means there's not a general prohibition against it because it's required to come up, right? And I mean, it's a little too cut and dry maybe, but I think there are so many things where people want to sort of posit a set of rules, like obatala should never drink, you know? TY: Mmmhmm. ANDREW: These people are going to be this way, this spirit's going to be that way, once you're a priest you should never do whatever again, and it's not that way, you know? It doesn't need to be that way. TY: Right. ANDREW: And that is that sort of stereotyping and you know, sort of modeling ideas that are not universal ... TY: Yes. ANDREW: But people want to make them, either because it gives them power, or cause they don't know better, right? TY: Yes. And in some cases, it's just superstitious and unnecessary. Like, I'll give you an example. I went to an Orisha birthday, to go see someone's Orisha, and you know in the process of ocha birthdays, we're sitting, we're gossip, we're talking shit. We get into a conversation about firearms, right? Because I don't go nowhere unarmed, okay? I'm a black woman living in the USA. I'm going to be ... if you see me, you're going to see ... ANDREW: I've seen your Instagram! TY: [laughs] You know, so ... we were talking about firearms, and there was a priest that was much older than me, I feel like she was in her 20s, and she was like, well you know, none of us carry weapons, we've all blunted all of the knives in our house because many of us have ogun [garbled at 00:38:38] in our Ita, and we give that over to Ogun. And I was like Er? What the hell does that have to do with your ability to protect yourself? Number one, did ogunda come in some harsh osogbo that told you to deal with the entire house, and what does any of that have to do with my basic human right to defend myself? ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: And then her response was, you know, well [inaudible--some missing audio? at 00:39:07] Ogun, I'm not going to take on Ogun's job, but I'm going to tell you, I'm going to tell you, I'm going to tell you, there's nothing he could have ever told me in Ita that would have had me unarmed for the rest of my life, not as a single mother, hell no. There is nothing you could have told ME that would have made me put down my firearms. And there was nothing that I heard her say out of her Ita that made any of that make sense to me. ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: That sounded crazy. But I hear this level of superstitious ignorance that manifests in general taboos for entire houses, all the time. Now suddenly one person's Ita is everybody's Ita. It's crazy! ANDREW: Sure. Well and I see -- I've seen that prohibition with that piece of advice come out in a reading for somebody, and it didn't surprise me, cause that relationship in that house was on the edge of exploding into physical conflict maybe, right? TY: Right. ANDREW: And so, like there are times when that stuff can come out and should come out, but that's where you gotta look at your life and see what's going on, right? Like I -- Somebody came to me for a reading and you know, it was one of those like, hey, the Orishas love you, hugs and kisses, see you later, right? And it was like, okay, when should I get initiated? And I was like, why? TY: Cause you're not about that. Right. ANDREW: “Are you sick? Are you broke? Are you ... like, what's going on?” And they're like, “No.” I'm like, "You're good, you don't need it, don't worry about it." You know? So, I think that that, yeah, it's where you need to be understanding about yourself and your relationship, right? TY: Yes, yes, and move beyond superstition. I think that we have a very sophisticated methodology and system of divination that doesn't give us ... we don't have the burden of having to have superstition. Or even faith, to a certain extent. We do divination, we do ebbó, ebbó works. [laughs] We trust that it works because we've seen in work. You know? We have divination and confirmation. ANDREW: Sure. TY: Which is one of the reasons why I like this tradition. Cause I ain't got to be believing in no pie in the sky! You do divination, you do the ebbó! [laughs] ANDREW: As Crowley puts it, right? TY: Right, right! ANDREW: As Crowley puts it in one of his books, success is your proof, right? That's it. Certainty, not faith, right? TY: Ase, and I've never done well with faith. Which is why Palo and Vodou make me happy, you do something, something happens. ANDREW: Right. TY: [laughs] You know? So. It's all of that, all of it. ANDREW: So, I have a question for you about the intimacy counseling and the work that you're doing with people, right? So, is that a energetic thing? Is that a spiritual practice? Is that like -- Where do the intersection ... Cause I'm always curious with people who practice a bunch of different things and then have outside people come and engage that, right? TY: Yeah. ANDREW: Are you engaging people within their own practices? Are they coming to you for practices? How does that look and work for you? TY: So, usually, it depends. People who have no relation to this practice but just need sex and intimacy coaching usually look like regular old clients. They book an appointment, we have some talk therapy, and then I do a healing. That healing may be energetic, like in tantric projection work or energy work that they need to clear out some trauma. It may be a past life regression or some spiritual cord that I have to cut cause of what they're dealing with. It may be physical, because as a somatic sex educator, we also guide people through certain body practices, so for example, if I have a person who is ashamed of their body as a result of trauma, has never masturbated. I might do guided coached masturbation, or I might have a couple who want to reinvigorate their sex life and they want to learn new techniques, so I'll guide them through it. So that's where the body-based therapy might come in. Someone in the tradition, it will probably start with some type of spiritual reading and see what's happening with you spiritually and then how that plays out in your life in the form of coaching. And the sex tends to be, especially in the tradition, talk therapy only. It comes out in my spiritual counseling, so like for example, I might do a divination, and let's say I see a lot of odí falling, and I know that there might be some addiction stuff, or some sexual trauma, some abuse, some other things, that that letter would point to. Well, I'll do the ebbó, I'll get that out of the way, but then after that I'm going to book a spiritual counseling session, and let's talk about what made that manifest on that, and what really needs to happen with you energetically and spiritually and hold space for that. And sometimes that is talk therapy around their sexual trauma, because of course, that letter fell and that oftentimes points to rape or molestation or all kinds of stuff, right? ANDREW: Sure. TY: In addition to that, as a tantrica, when I lead workshops with people, mostly single women or couples, they're looking to bring the sacred into their bedroom in a certain way. In terms of my tantra training, I came through, I'm an initiated tantric, I was initiated in the Shri Vidya lineage, a Debi Kudarum, very goddess-centered, and to me, it ain't nothing but some Indian Palo honey, I don't know, cause you know, they with them goddesses, they put out them yantras, honey and you get to chant and then that thing MOVES, okay, but in addition to Shri Vidya tantra, I studied Ipsaun tantra, Shakti pat, I received several activations, and I am now studying grand trine active shamanistic tantra. So, I will teach them how to do tantric projection, like no hands, no touch, energy orgasms, healing the body and the trauma energetically, and even just tantric lovemaking, tantric interaction. And I've found that people in this tradition, even though the two don't overlap, they are very interested in it, because again, we don't have a space to have these conversations. We don't have a way of talking about how we can relate in a spiritual manner [laughs] that, you know. ANDREW: Well, we're all human beings, right? We want to ultimately, I think, one of our desires, for almost everybody, is to want to show up on every level for the sexy times, right, you know? Cause once you understand or experience other levels of awareness ... TY: Right. ANDREW: You know? You want to bring that everywhere, right? But as you say, it's not really a ... there's not really a mechanism for that. TY: Right, right. I mean but the thing is I feel that we do, we do have our concept of sacred relationship because for, in my opinion, when the awo, and his apedibi, Soday, and marry, that's our sacred relationship, when the Ialosha and the Babalosha marry. They ... that's our sacred relationship, because now you have the bringing together of these two powerful entities that can birth something. Now what's going to change it is the context, the intention, the consciousness, and what you're going to put forth in it. But the fact that it exists ... I think is ... I think if it didn't exist there would be no need for the Babala to have an Apedibi, to have that feminine counterpart to the masculine, you know? To bring about that balance and uplift his Ifa. [laughs] You know what I'm saying? So, we definitely have it, but do we understand what we have? Do we not articulate it? And then what does it mean? So, you know, doubling back to your initial question, your average person looks like talk therapy and then whatever body-based somatic therapy they may need according to their issue. The average person in this tradition, I kind of keep separate, and it stays on like a counseling, I have to counsel them one on one, because a), having the conversation itself is damn near taboo, as conservative as we are, and b) you can't bring that into ritual, you've got to do ritual first and then have a separate conversation about that. ANDREW: For sure. Yeah. Mmmhmm. I've got to say I dig how you're navigating all that. TY: [laughs] Yeah. ANDREW: So, I've got one more question for you before we wrap up. TY: Uh huh. ANDREW: So, how do you sustain all these traditions you're doing? I get a little tired just hearing about it! [laughs] TY: On a schedule. [laughs] ANDREW: Yeah! TY: Well, I work for myself, so I wake up, usually I have sunrise meditation and yoga, and then I tend to my ancestors and whatever loa might be that day, so Tuesdays I'm on my Petro, and you know, whatever, Thursdays I'm on my rada, and then I go ahead and reap my Orisha, my ifa, and I keep it moving. At night, I normally deal with my prendas ... ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: And I try to keep my workings to them around what's going on in the sky, and I mostly work that outside and at night. And you know, loa gives you a schedule, cause loa has to be served every day, and you know, it's certain people that you serve on certain days. Orisha, all they need daily is to breathe, pour libations and keep it moving, you know? I might throw to my Orisha, you know, my head Orisha once a month, Elegba, maybe once a week, appease him, you know, my little Sundays or Mondays, I keep it moving! You know, they, it's just ... it's such a part of my lifestyle, it's I wake up, yoga, meditation, greet Luwan, have your day, come back, say hello to the Palo people, go to bed. You got ebbó to do, do your work. ANDREW: Yeah. TY: [laughs] ANDREW: I love it. I mean I think it's one of those things, right? So many people ... I hear many people who kind of say that they want to live that kind of life, right? You know, that that's what they're looking for. TY: You gotta be built for that life. ANDREW: Yeah. [laughs] ANDREW: Yeah, cause you know, I mean, it's one of those things, right? I mean, you know, I mostly just, I mean I work with my, you know, my spirit guides and my Orisha, right? But like, it takes up a chunk of time and energy and it takes a real consistency of focus that I think that is challenging, you know? I know that I certainly when I was starting out struggled with it. And that sort of scheduling it, and just being like these are the ways that things happen, that's it, right? TY: Yeah. That's it! ANDREW: The obligation needs to be sustained, right? TY: Yeah, and I think because I didn't do it back to back. Like I had years in between each so I kind of was able to get acclimated, develop a routine, before something else came in, you know? And they're separate, I keep them separate, like they each have their own room, their own space, all of that. But they function in similar ways. ANDREW: Mmmhmm. TY: You know what I'm saying? They function in similar ways. ANDREW: Yeah. TY: So, every day if I get up and I greet my ancestors, that's gonna be a new tradition. And today, you know, I might have to blow some rum [inaudible at 00:50:04] You know what I mean? So, I mean it's not as far in or as complicated as some people make it sound. ANDREW: [inaudible--asking to repeat] TY: I said it's not as far in or complicated as some people make it sound. Even if you were just the palero, right? You're not sitting with your nganga for hours every day! You're not doing that! ANDREW: No. TY: Or most, you get up, you greet, you light 'em up and you keep it moving, unless you got something to do! ANDREW: Yeah. TY: That doesn't change, cause you got other things. ANDREW: That's true. And they've got other places to be too, right? TY: Right! ANDREW: Like they're not sitting 24 hours a day waiting for everyone. “Oh my god, I'm not bringing the tv down here, you know, we're not watching our shows together, I'm getting sad about this,” that doesn't happen, yeah. TY: They should be out there fixing the problems in my life, not sitting here! [laughs] ANDREW: Mmmhmm. For sure. That's awesome. Well, thank you so much for making time today, Ty. TY: Yep. ANDREW: People want to come and find you online, where's the best place to come and hang with you? TY: http://www.iamtyshaw.com. ANDREW: Beautiful! Go check it out! TY: Yes. ANDREW: All right. Well, thank you. TY: Yes, thank you! We'll talk soon. All right, bye.

In our Season 1 Finale, journey through the metropolitan world of the ancient Egyptian city of Alexandria, discover how its famous library lives on to this day, and walk alongside one of the most fascinating women in Western history. Learn how the story of Hypatia reveals how religious extremism tore apart the ancient world... and how her tale reveals the path humanity must take as we face the same problem in our modern world!  Show Notes References and Resources: The Rise and Fall of Alexandria: Birthplace of the Modern World by Justin Pollard, Alexandria, City of the Western World by Theodore Vrettos, Hypatia of Alexandria by Maria Dzielska Hypatia of Alexandria: Mathematician and Martyr by Michael Deakin, Agora (Movie, released in 2009 by Lionsgate, starring Rachel Weisz), The Closing of the Western Mind: The Rise of Faith and the Fall of Reason by Charles Freeman, "Legitimization Under Constantine" by Shaye Cohen, for PBS Frontline, available online at: www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/why/legitimization.html "Constantine the Great Rules" from National Geographic, available online at: www.nationalgeographic.com/lostgospel/timeline_10.html The Stolen Light of Women by C.C. Campbell Please join us on Facebook.com/cwhatliesbeyond or Tweet us @cwhatliesbeyond What Lies Beyond is copyrighted by Anu Esoteric Media (www.anuesotericmedia.com) The voice of What Lies Beyond is C.C. Campbell, author of The Stolen Light of Women, available now on Amazon and at your local independent bookstores.

Olympiodorus the Younger (ΟΛΥΜΠΙΟΔΩΡΟΣ Ο ΝΕΩΤΕΡΟΣ) was a Neoplatonist philosopher who lived in the early years of the Byzantine Empire. Justinian's Decree of 529 AD closed Plato's Academy in Athens and other Pagan schools but Olympiodorus avoided persecution in part because the Alexandrian School was less involved in politics. At his death the School passed into the hands of Christian Aristotelians. Painting: La fábula de Leda (The Fable of Leda) by Eugenio Cajés (1575-1634) and based off of a painting by Antonio da Correggio (1489-1534). Translated by George Burges. Audiobook read by Geoffrey Edwards.

THE ANGELS OF MONS: http://www.ukapologetics.net/10/sandringhams.htm http://mystiquearth.blogspot.com/2009/04/angels-of-mons-rescues-british-soldiers.html PRE-TRIB VIEW ON IMMINENCY: http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/doctrine-of-imminency-is-it-biblical IMMINENCY RECONSIDERED: http://www.preteristarchive.com/Hyper/2006_hibbard_presuppositions.html ORIGEN'S VIEW OF REINCARNATION: "Origen, as stated earlier, was an influential Church Father--the most influential, perhaps, up until St. Augustine. He began his career in Alexandria, Egypt which, at the time, was a cosmopolitan melting pot brewing with religious and philosophical ideas--Christian, Greek, Roman, Jewish, Neoplatonist, Egyptian, even Buddhist and Brahmanist. Now it so happens that in one of Origen's extremely numerous works, First Principles (in Latin called de Principiis and in Greek, its original language, Peri Archon), he speculatively addressed the possibility of a certain kind of reincarnation. The view considered there, however, is much different than either the Pythagorean or modern views. Origen described a model--as a technical possibility, pure conjecture and identified as such--in which the present universe as we know it is but one of many successive universes that are created and uncreated in a series of Ages or eras (aeons). By this view, a person's soul may inhabit a different body (allowing for a broad definition of body) in successive Ages. Further, the circumstances of one's incarnation from one age to the next depend on ones actions in the previous life (Dave rejects this view). Origen rejected, however, the idea that a person might be incarnated more than once in the present age." http://www.john-uebersax.com/plato/origen1.htm MORE INFO: http://www.near-death.com/reincarnation/history/church-history.html ROOM 2 AUDIO (not available on iTunes): http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=137354&cmd=tc ALT. LINK: https://player.fm/series/out-of-darknessinto-the-light-2a PODCAST EMAIL: intothelight@gmail.com PAYPAL EMAIL: orgustine@gmail.com

A history of Hypatia, the first recorded female mathematician: http://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and-events/hypatia-sifting-the-mythsThe first woman mathematician of whom we have reasonably secure and detailed knowledge, Hypatia was the daughter of Theon of Alexandria, mathematician, astronomer, and member of the Museum. Reputed to have outshone her father in her studies, she devoted her life to the teaching of mathematics and Neoplatonist philosophy in Alexandria. She is most famous for her brutal murder (c.415 AD) by a zealous crowd of monks. Much has been written about her, but little is known for certain. This talk attempts to give an account of current thinking on her life and her mathematics.The transcript and downloadable versions of the lecture are available from the Gresham College website: http://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and-events/hypatia-sifting-the-mythsGresham College has been giving free public lectures since 1597. This tradition continues today with all of our five or so public lectures a week being made available for free download from our website. There are currently over 1,800 lectures free to access or download from the website.Website: http://www.gresham.ac.ukTwitter: http://twitter.com/GreshamCollegeFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/greshamcollegeInstagram: http://www.instagram.com/greshamcollege

The University of Denver’s Center for Judaic Studies is creating a Holocaust Memorial Social Action Site which honors memory through the active cultivation of social justice activities on campus. In this spirit, the site’s boundary is marked with the Hebrew “Hineni,” “Here I am,” a Levinasian call to enacting memory through ethical engagement and response. In this paper, I explore the Levinasian conception of memory and ethics that frames this project, as I also explore the theoretical limits of any counter-memorial that operates within the parameters of the “art world.” Our project is a counter-memorial that privileges ethics; we have used relatively few dollars for the material space and have moved away from a search for an artist; instead we have earmarked the majority of funds for programs and for an eventual Endowed Chair of Holocaust Studies and Social Justice. In the spirit of James Young’s reminder that the history of the memorial itself functions as an integral part of the memorial, I also talk, in the paper, about the journey in this particular project from aesthetics to ethics (in the recounting of our process of hiring a well-known artist and then finding our way instead to a series of interfaith and social justice projects on the campus). Sarah Pessin is Associate Professor of Philosophy, the Emil and Eva Hecht Chair in Judaic Studies, and the Director of the Center for Judaic Studies at the University of Denver. Sarah works on topics in Jewish and Islamic philosophy, Neoplatonisms, medieval philosophies, comparative philosophies of religion, modern Jewish philosophy, and post-Holocaust theology. She is very active in interfaith and cross-cultural bridge-building, and is interested in the nature of the sacred and its relation to inter-human engagement and response. Sarah has published and presented widely, and has recently published the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on Solomon Ibn Gabirol; she is currently working on a manuscript on that medieval Neoplatonist’s “Theology of Desire”, and she has forthcoming essays on Muslim philosophical conceptions of matter; Jewish, Muslim and Christian Platonisms; Hans Jonas’s “Theology of Risk,” and an essay exploring the Levinasian elements of DU’s new Holocaust Memorial Social Action Site (forthcoming in the Memory issue of the University of Toronto’s Journal of Jewish Studies).

As pagan traditions started to dwindle in the face of the rising popularity of Christianity in the third and fourth century C.E., a new interpretation of ancient philosophy was born. Drawing from the cosmology of the Thimaeus, this tradition attempted to revive the writings of Plato for a new time. This was a world view which gave place not only to the gods of the classic Greek mythology but also to an interpretation of the transcendent monotheistic deity. This school of philosophy later became known as Neoplatonism. With its roots in 2nd century Alexandria, Neoplatonism shares much of its cultural heritage with hermetism. Yet Neoplatonism's most famous proponent was not an Alexandrian, but instead came from Syria. His name was Iamblichus. Orating within a tradition that oftentimes had little interest in magical pursuits, Iamblchus became an important apologetic of esoteric practices. The writings of Iamblichus include a new definition of sacred magic dubbed Theurgy, or divine-working, which ought to sound familiar even to many new age practitioners today. Neoplatonism came to an abrupt end in 529 A.D. when Emperor Justinian forced the Neoplatonist schools in Alexandria and Athens to close their doors. However, neoplatonist philosophy survived outside the Christian world, being openly adopted in the Islamic world and having a profound influence on the medieval Kabbalists. Together with the Hermetism, Neoplatonist philosophy was revived in Western Europe at the early days of the Renaissance and was again studied and adopted by the intellectuals of a new time.

Welcome BACK to Communion Sanctorum: History of the Christian Church.We ended our summary & overview narrative of Church History after 150 episodes; took a few months break, and are back to it again with more episodes which aim to fill in the massive gaps we left before.This time, we'll do series that go into detail on specific moments, movements, people, places, and other topics.The title of this episode is The First Centuries – Part 1.Ask almost anyone with at least a vague awareness of the early years of the Christianity, and they will likely tell you it was a time of intense persecution. Ask how many believers were put to death and the number will range from tens of thousands to a few million.From stories, movies, and paintings of the era, many have the mental image of a mass of defenseless Christians dressed in white, huddled on an arena floor, surrounded by hungry lions. The stands are packed with spectators shouting for blood. But that image, common as it may be, is rather misleading. Did it happen? Undoubtedly. But it wasn't the ubiquitous scene many assume. Before the dawn of the 3rd C, official imperial attempts to eradicate Christianity were largely unorganized and lukewarm. Roman emperors were rarely the terror to the Faith popular literature has made them. I say rarely, because there were some notable exceptions prior to the 3rd C. After that, things changed dramatically. Some emperors delighted in tormenting Jesus' followers. Ending Christianity in the most brutal manner seems to have been a major focus for some of them.Why did Rome persecute Christians? And why is it the popular concept of this time that it was an Era of Martyrs?It's best to get at this by backing up a bit to consider Rome's attitude toward religion. And how are we to do that pray-tell? For attitudes toward religion vary from person to person, and time to time. Among the ancients; Roman, Greek, Jew, Parthian, or whatever, there were those who were devout, the profane, and a whole spread of shades of piety from one end of the religious spectrum to the other. What we're considering here is the basic Roman civic approach to religion.It might surprise the modern student to learn that political leaders of Rome served a religious function that was part & parcel of their political task. Their civic duties included cultic rituals. Roman religion was heavily invested in public ceremonies and sacrifices. Personally held religious beliefs weren't as important as most modern religions regard them. What was important, pre-eminently so, was the possession of pietas. Pietas was religious duty. It meant honoring the sacred Roman traditions in the accepted way. The English word piety is derived from Pietas. But piety wasn't an option for any Roman who desired to climb the political ranks. It was an absolute essential and something to be demonstrated publicly.Pietas was THE distinguishing virtue of Rome's founding hero, Aeneas, who's given the epithet of “pius” by Virgil in the Aeneid. Cicero elevated pietas to the place Christians would later assign Agape. It was the duty a good Roman was to show to the gods and his fellow man. And by doing so, ensured the safety and prosperity of the State.Romans of the 2nd C BC to the 4th AD saw themselves as owing a debt of gratitude to their ancestors who embodied the virtues they treasured. It seems our time isn't the only one that looks to a past Golden Age of yesteryear when “all the women were strong and the men were good-looking.” Romans assigned themselves a custodial roll in preserving the traditions of their ancestors. And not just theirs. They expanded that custody over the traditions of those they conquered. So though they despised the Jewish religion for its seeming irreligious monotheism and refusal to cast Yahweh's form – because it was an ancient belief, it came under their protection, as did several other Eastern faiths that were too divergent from that of the Greeks and Romans to allow for inclusion in the Roman pantheon.Christianity was different. It was originally regarded by Rome as a Jewish reform movement; something Jewish leaders would have to deal with within their esoteric and opaque system.What worried Rome was the rapidity by which the new faith grew. That, and it defied some of Rome's most cherished ideas about how religion ought to be conducted. Rome was all about the PUBLIC display of ritual. Religion was a community thing. Christians, on the other hand, were secretive. They conducted their services in private and were reluctant to talk publicly about what they did behind closed doors. That reluctance owed to the wild & salacious rumors spread by critics. Calumny began early for Christians. In some places, Jewish opponents, jealous at the success of Christian evangelism, twisted aspects of the Christian message into accusations and whispered them in the ears of officials. Things like, Christians practiced cannibalism, because of the Lord's Table. It was said they were incestuous, because they held what were called “Love Feasts” where they referred to each other as “brother and sister.” And most damning, was the pagan perception that Christians were in reality practical-atheists. That charge is incomprehensible to modern believers contending with the likes of Dawkins & Harris and their New Atheist compatriots. But in the early centuries, Christians were regarded by their pagan neighbors as atheists precisely because they believed in only ONE God, rather than a plethora.Though believers tried to dispel these damning mis-conceptions, they lived on. As has been said; A lie travels half-way round the world before truth has put its shoes on. So Christians sequestered themselves behind closed doors and met in secret to conduct their clandestine meetings.The popular Roman mentality toward religion was that it needed to be practiced in public as an expression of the community's devotion to the gods, who'd reward this public piety with divine favor. It was relatively easy for them to accept the faiths of those they conquered since they already believed in a multiplicity of deities. What matter that there were now a few more?That policy of tolerance for the religions of their conquests was sorely tried when it came to the Jews. Though many Romans despised the monotheism of Judaism, toleration was begrudgingly given simply on the basis of the antiquity of the Jewish faith. That toleration was strained to the breaking point under the reign of the mad Emperor Caligula who demanded to be worshipped as a god. Then after the First Jewish–Roman War of AD 66-73, the Jews were allowed to practice their religion only so long as they paid a new tax, the “fiscus Judaicus” ON TOP OF the exorbitant taxes that had sparked their revolt in the first place.There's debate among historians over whether the Roman government simply saw Christianity as a sect of Judaism prior to Emperor Nerva's modification of the fiscus Judaicus in 96. From then on, Jews had to pay while Christians didn't. SO that seems to suggest an official distinction was made between the 2 groups.A measure of the Roman disdain for Christianity came from the belief that it was bad for society. In the 3rd C, the Neoplatonist philosopher Porphyry labelled Jesus' followers as impious & anti-social atheists. Their impiety was located, not in what we'd call traditional morality, but in their refusal to engage in the public religious rituals that were understood by the pagan world as a way to gain the favor of the gods.Once Christians were distinguished from Jews, the Faith was no longer grand-fathered into reluctant acceptance. No – it became “superstitio.”For Romans, superstition had a dangerous connotation; far more so that in today's parlance. It meant religious practices not just different form the norm; they were corrosive to society. Superstition was a set of beliefs that if embraced, dehumanized someone. If enough embraced them and were detached from their humanitas, society would unravel; an ancient spiritual zombie apocalypse. Roman squelching of such dangerous superstitions happened in 428 BC when an unnamed group was eradicated for having caused a damaging drought. In 186 BC, the Romans moved against initiates of the cult of Bacchus when they got unruly. And of course, there's the famous Roman campaign against the Druids.The intensity of Christian persecution depended upon how dangerous they were deemed to be by the local official responsible for conducting such oversight. To be frank, Christian beliefs didn't endeared them to many officials. Think about it. They . . .1) Worshipped a convicted criminal,2) Refused to swear by the emperor's genius,3) Railed against Roman depravity in their writings,4) And conducted their suspicious services in private.In his Apologeticus, addressed to the magistrates of Carthage in the Summer of 197 AD, the early church father Tertullian remarked, “We have the reputation of living aloof from crowds.”One of the more frequent word used to describe Christians in the NT is hagios, translated “saints.” Literally = holy ones. Bu the root of the word means to be different, set-apart.  If something is holy, it's different from other things. That difference lies in it's purpose. It's for God; dedicated exclusively to Him. So, a temple is holy because it's different from all other buildings; the Sabbath is holy because it's dedicated to God. Christians are saints, because they belong to God. Jesus' followers felt this distinction keenly; they embraced it, knowing it set them at odds with their pagan neighbors.It's human nature to regard those who are different with suspicion. So the more seriously early Christians took their faith the more hostility they faced. Simply by living in obedience to Jesus, Christians condemned paganism. Christians didn't run around wagging their fingers or tongues in condemnation of unbelievers. Nor did they advocate and promotes a self-righteous superiority. It just that the Christian ethic revealed the shabbiness of a pagan life.If that's all the Christians were guilty of though, persecution would not have broken out against them in such fury. What sparked it was their vehement rejection of the pagan gods. The ancient world had deities for everything. There was a goddess for sowing  & another for reaping. There was a god for clear skies and another for rain. Mountains had gods, as did trees & rivers & valleys. For Christians, most of who had at one time worshipped these deities, they were a fiction! And it would be one thing to go quietly about their business with that view, you know, keeping their religion to themselves. But pagans wouldn't let them. Because every meal began by pouring out a few drops of wine as an offering to the pagan gods. Feasts & parties were held in a temple after sacrifice. The invitation was to dine at the table of some god. It was an ancient version of Chuck E Cheese. But instead of ignoring the dated mechanical rodent, you had to worship it before being allowed to eat your pizza. Christians simply couldn't attend. When she or he turned down the invitation, they were reviled as rude & anti-social.There were other events and gatherings Christians avoided because they considered them inherently immoral. They weren't alone in that assessment. Many moral pagans objected to them as well. Gladiatorial contests are an example. In theaters across the empire, Romans made prisoners & slaves to fight to the death for amusement & entertainment of the crowd.Refusal to practice idolatry led to financial difficulties. What was a mason to do if as a believer he refused to work stones for a pagan temple or a tailor balked at making a robe for a heathen priest, or a baker refused to make a cake for a . . . never mind.Tertullian forbade Christians teaching school, because it meant using books with stories of the gods.As I share that little piece of history, let's be cognizant of the almost certain reality that Tertullian's position was in all likelihood not something all believers, and not necessarily even all leaders agreed with. Truth be told, his may have been a minority opinion. The problem is we just don't have much evidence of what the rest of the Church held regarding this. There was no tirade of tweets one February in the 3rd C over what occupations Christians could and couldn't fill. It wasn't a topic people blogged on. No Facebook pages were devoted to it. All we have is Tertullian's remark. Maybe his pastoral peers disagreed and sent him pointed emails about it. Forgive the anachronism; I take it you get my point.The larger point for us to glean is that during a time of widespread and aggressive paganism that REQUIRED Christians to go along to get along, many believers found themselves stepping away from public and civil life because in the contest with remaining faithful to Jesus, their conscience demanded it.Everywhere Christians turned their lives and faith were on display because the Gospel introduced a revolutionary new attitude toward life. This was exhibited most clearly in the realms of Sex, Slaves, and Children.The Church of the Modern Era has often endured scorn for its old-fashioned views on the sanctity of marriage & marital physical intimacy. That isn't a criticism early Christians faced, at least from most moral philosophers. On the contrary, ancient Roman moral pundits lamented the abysmal sexual immorality of their times. Raising the sanctity of marriage, along with attitudes toward marital fidelity, was one of the Emperor Augustus' pet projects. Christianity, infused as it was with a Biblical view of marriage and sex, regarded the body as the temple of the Holy Spirit, withy marriage as a picture of the Church's union with Christ. Couples who lived out the Gospel in their homes exhibited a quality of life pagans longed for. But it marked them as radically different; and we all know how the mass reacts to that!Slavery was another matter altogether. It was here that Christianity was regarded as a dangerous force for it attributed dignity to all people regardless of status or state. It's reported that when Christians met for their distinctive services, masters and their slaves shed the distinctions that marked their lives just before and after the service. Greco-Roman culture might regard slaves as mere living tools, as Plato described them. But Christians esteemed slaves as of equal value with the free. In a society stratified by endless causes for division, the followers of Jesus bore a shocking disregard for those differences. But with the horrors of periodic slave uprisings still fresh in the collective memory, outsiders came to regard the Christian message as dangerously subversive to the social order.The attitude seemed to be à “Hey, look; it's great the Christians see all people as equal yet are able to maintain the traditional roles our legal system has imposed. But we now that at some point, if more people go in for this Christian thing, the salves will reach a critical mass and will rebel again. Last time they did, I lost 2 friends and I don't want to go through that again.”The sanctity of human life that framed the core of the Christian attitude towards slaves & slavery applied toward children, and in particular, to infants. Unlike their neighbor-pagans, Christians refused to leave their unwanted or physically distressed children in some out of the way place to be left to die of exposure, or to be carried off by traffickers who'd invest a little food now for the pay-off of selling or using them later. In fact, not only did Christian refrain from this barbaric practice, they often rescued such exposed infants and raised them as their own, which of course put an additional financial burden on already strained incomes.We'll halt here and pick it up at this point in the next episode. We'll begin by taking a look at the first systematic persecution under Nero in AD64.

This episode is titled – The Divide.I begin with a quote from a man known to scholars as Pseudo Dionysius the Areopagite. In a commentary on the names of God he wrote . . .The One is a Unity which is the unifying Source of all unity and a Super-Essential Essence, a Mind beyond the reach of mind and a Word beyond utterance, eluding Discourse, Intuition, Name, and every kind of being. It is the Universal Cause of existence while Itself existing not, for It is beyond all Being and such that It alone could give a revelation of Itself.If that sounds more like something an Eastern guru would come up with, don't worry, you're right. Dionysius isn't called Pseudo for nothing.We'll get to him a bit deeper into this episode.The late 5th & 6th Cs saw important developments in the Eastern church. It's the time of the premier Byzantine Emperor, Justinian. But 2 contemporaries of his also made important contributions to the most important institutions of the medieval church in the West. One of them we've already mentioned in brief, the other we'll devote an episode to; Benedict of Nursia & Pope Gregory the Great.By the end of the 6th C, the unique characteristics of the Eastern and Western churches had coalesced in two different traditions. While the West remained loyal to the pattern held at Rome, the East emerged in 3 directions.The major Councils held at Ephesus & Chalcedon to decide the issue raised by the debate between Cyril of Alexandria & Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, over the nature of Christ, produced a 3-way split in the Eastern church. That split continues to this day and is seen in what's called the . . .(1) Chalcedonian or Byzantine Orthodox church(2) Those called Monophysites or Oriental Orthodox, which follows the theological line of Cyril &(3) The Nestorian Church of the East.Without going into all the intricate details of the debates, suffice it to say the Eastern Church wasn't satisfied with the Western-inspired formula describing the nature of Jesus adopted at the Council of Chalcedon in 451. In a scenario reminiscent of what had happened all the way back at the first council at Nicaea in 325, while they concluded the council at Chalcedon with an agreed creed, some bishops later hemmed & hawed over the verbiage. To those Eastern bishops beholden to Cyril, Chalcedon sounded too Nestorian to swallow. Chalcedon said Jesus was “1 person in 2 natures.” The balking bishops wanted to alter that to say he was “out of 2 natures” before the incarnation, but after he was 1 nature.Now, for those listening to several of these podcasts in a row rather than spaced out over several weeks, I know this is repetitious. In a brief summary let me recap Cyril's & Nestorius' views. Regarding how to understand who Jesus is; that is, how His identities as both God & Man related to each other . . .Cyril said he was both God & Man, but that the divine so overwhelmed the human it became virtually meaningless. The analogy was that his humanity was a drop of ink in the ocean of His divinity. Therefore, Mary was the Theotokos – the mother of God.Nestorius, balked at that title, saying Mary was Jesus human mother who became the means by which Jesus was human but that she should not be called the mother of God. Nestorius said Jesus was both human & divine and emphasized his humanity and the role it played in the redemption of lost sinners.Because Nestorius reacted to what he considered the aberrant position of Cyril, and because he lacked tact and a knew when to shut up, his opponents claimed he taught Jesus wasn't just of 2 natures but was 2 persons living in the same body. For this, he was branded a heretic.But when the Council of Chalcedon finally issued its official stand on what compromised Christian orthodoxy regarding the person & natures of Christ, Nestorius said they'd only articulated what he'd always taught.So it's little wonder post-Chalcedon bishops of the Cyrillian slant rejected Chalcedon. Their view left the humanity of Christ as an abstract and impersonal dimension of His nature. Because they SO emphasized His deity, at the cost of his humanity, they were branded as “Monophysites” or sometimes you'll hear it pronounced as “muh-noph–uh-sites.” Sadly, just as those labeled Nestorian weren't heretical as the name came to mean, the term Monophysite is also inaccurate because they did not DENY Jesus' humanity.The Greek prefix mono implies “only one” nature. A better descriptor is monophysite. Hen- is the Greek prefix meaning one, but without the “only” limiter.But the Eastern push-back on Chalcedon wasn't just theological; it was also nationalistic. The church in Egypt went into revolt after the Council because their patriarch Dioscorus was deposed!Then in Canon 28 of the Council's creed, Constantinople was elevated as 2nd only to Rome in terms of prestige, so both Alexandria & Antioch got their togas in a bunch. Those bishops who supported Chalcedon were labeled “Melchites,” meaning royalists because they supported the Imperial church.We've noted that while the Western Emperor was out of the picture by this time, so that the Roman pope stood as a kind of lone figure leading the West, the Eastern Emperor at Constantinople still wielded tremendous authority in the Church. We might wonder therefore why they didn't step in to settle the issue about the nature of Christ.  They wanted to. Several of them would have liked to repudiate Chalcedon, but their hands were tied, because there was one part of the Council they wanted to keep – Canon 28, setting up Constantinople as technically Rome's second, but in reality, her equal.Now, as I studied the material that follows the debates between the Henophysites & Chalcedonians I found myself at a loss on how to relate it without boring the bejeebers out of you. I spent quite a bit of time working, editing, re-editing, deleting, restoring, and deleting again before deciding to just say that in the East during the 5th & 6th Cs, just about everybody was caught up in this thing. Emperors, bishops, patriarchs, metropolitans, monks, priests, & the common people. There are technical words like Encyclion, Henoticon, Severan, Acacian that are employed to define the different sides taken in the debate, and those who tried to forge a compromise. And let me tell you – THOSE guys failed miserably in working a compromise. They got hammered by BOTH sides.Regarding the long debate over the natures of Christ in the East, Everett Ferguson says that the irony is that the Chalcedonians, Henophysites, and the Church of the East were really trying to say the same thing about Jesus. He was somehow at the same time 2 somethings, but a single individual. Their different starting points gave different formulations their opponents couldn't accept for theological reasons and wouldn't for political reasons.Switching gears: Around 500 one of the most influential thinkers in Greek Orthodox spirituality made his mark, Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite. His real name is unknown. He claimed to be Dionysius, one of Paul's Athenian converts mentioned in Acts 17. His contemporaries accepted his writings as legit. We know now they weren't.Pseudo-Dionysius combined Christianity & Neoplatonism into a mish-mash slap-dash theology that appealed to both Chalcedonians and Henophysites. Probably because when you read it you inwardly say, “What?” but had to nod your head saying how amazing it was so you wouldn't appear stupid. Like when I read or listen to Stephen Hawking waxing eloquent on some tangent of astrophysics; I say, “Wow! That guy's brilliant!” But don't ask me to explain what I just heard. He speaks English, but it might as well be ancient Akkadian.Besides being a Neoplatonist, Pseudo-Dionysius was also a mystic, meaning someone who claimed to have had an experience of union with God, not just a deep sense of connection to Him, but an actual uniting with the essence of deity. Pseudo-Dionysius became the author of a branch of Christian mysticism that was hugely influential in Eastern Christianity. When his work was translated into Latin in the 9th C, he became influential in the West as well.Pseudo-Dionysius writings stressed a tendency already found in Greek Christian authors like Origen, Athanasius, and Gregory of Nyssa who said the goal of human salvation was a kind of making humans divine.We need to be careful here, because as soon as I say that, all the Western Christians say, “Wait! What?!!?!? Back the truck up Billy Bob. I think we just ran over something.”There is in Eastern Orthodoxy a different understanding of salvation from that of Roman Catholicism & Classic Protestantism.Eastern Orthodoxy understands that the saved are destined to a level of glory in heaven that is on an order of existence that can only properly be described as divine.No; humans don't become gods; not like the one true and only Creator God. But they were created in His image and will be restored to & completed in that image so that they will be as much LIKE God as a created being can be and still not be God.This quasi-deification is attained by purification, illumination, and perfection, meaning union with God, which became the three stages of enlightenment espoused by classic mysticism.Okay, hang with me as we go deep. Pseudo-Dionysius identified three stages in how someone seeking the fullness of salvation can describe God:1) Giving Him a name was affirmative theology.2) Denying that name was negative theology. And …3) Then reconciling the contradiction by looking beyond language was superlative theology.The way of negation led to the contemplation that marks mystical theology, which was considered a simpler and purer way to understand God. In other words, it's easier to know who and what God is by concentrating on what He's not. And if that seems backward and nonsensical – welcome to the club of those who aren't mystics and just scratch their heads when the mystics start talking.Pseudo-Dionysius' arrangement of angels into nine levels became the basis for the medieval doctrine of angels.Reading Pseudo-Dionysius can be frustrating for those who try to parse out his logic and seek to discern in his words some profound truths. While all very spiritual sounding, they're typical of many such mystical tomes; a cascade of words that defy interpreting. The mind is set in a place of trying to reconcile competing, and ultimately contradictory ideas. This tension causes the reader to mentally shut down, and it's in that state of suspended reason that the soul is supposed to be able to connect to God. It's the same effect as repeated mantras and eastern style meditation.Still, Pseudo-Dionysius was extremely influential in shaping how countless Christians of the 6th through 10th Cs went about seeking to grow in their relationship with God. Today, we dismiss him by calling him Pseudo-, Fake-, Fraud-, Poser-Dionysius.