1 Dr. Stanislav Matičič Semantika in simbolika

Transcription

Sim bolna govorica v PSALMIH
Dr. Stanislav Mati i
Javno PREDAVANJE
1
:
Semantika in simbolika – Simboli in simbolna govorica v PSALMIH
Uvod – isto na kratko o PSALMIH
1. Psalmi so del Pisma
1. a. Psalmi so nastajali tudi pod vplivom širšega okolja
1. a. a. Velike kulture Vzhoda
1. b. Sumerska kultura in literatura
1. c. Babilonci in nadaljnje zlivanje in dopolnjevanje izro il in besedil
1. d. Asirsko obdobje in njegov doprinos; Medijci in Perzijci
1. e. Nekaj bibli nih vzporednic z mezopotamsko književnostjo
1. e. 1. Utnapištimov odgovor Gilgamešu
1. e. 2. Job in besedilo iz sumerskega (babil.)2 obdobja
Sumersko (babil.) besedilo
1. e. 3. Vzporednica sumerskega besedila s Psalmom 91, Božje razodevanje v nevihti
Sumersko (babil.) besedilo
2. Psalmi so svojevrstne pesmi
3. Bolj kot ostala besedila, te pesmi »zapojejo« Besedo.
4. Kako Judje razdelijo Psalme ?
5. Kdaj je Psalterij dobil dosedanjo podobo?
6. Stara protestantska ekzegeza in literarne vrste
7. Psalmi - osrednji izraz hebrejske vere
8. Ali so Psalmi prevedljivi?
8. a. Interpretacija je nevarna. Hude zgodovinske napake v zgodovini Cerkve.
9. Ali je še kakšna stvar za Psalme posebej zna ilna?
II. DEL: SVET SIMBOLOV
1. Kaj so simboli in katere so njihove zna ilnosti?
2. Simbol moramo najprej razlikovati od znamenja
2. a. Slika simbolov
3. Arhetipski simboli (C. G. Jung)
4. »Neulovljivost« simbolov
5. Simboli ni dinamizem in njegova široka dejavnost za posameznika in družbo
5. 1. Osem zakonitosti simbolne dinamike:
5. 1. 1. Simbol v dinamiki odkrivanja
5. 2. S prvo vlogo je povezana druga, vloga dinami ne zamenjave
5. 3. Posredniška vloga simbolov
5. 4. Vloga poenotenja
5. 5. Terapevtska in vgojna vloga simbolov
5. 6. Socializacija in simboli
5. 7. Simboli in simbolna resonanca
1
V LJUBLJANI na rnu ah, na povabilo gospoda župnika Stanislava Štefani a. Predavanje je pridvedeno za
nastopno predavanje v ciklu predavanj za župnijo, v oktobru 2005.
2
Upoštevati je treba razvoj samih besedih skozi dolo ena obdobja.
1
2
5. 8. Simboli kot transformator psihi nih mo i
III. DEL: NEKAJ ILUSTRACIJ – Simbolika v odbranih Psalmih
Psalm 1
Psalm 6
Psalm 29
Psalm 91
__________________________________
(DODATEK)3 - Razširitev predavanja:
Simboli svetega Pisma in današnje oznanilo (simbolna teologija in oznanilo).
a. Moderne simbolne teologije (Charles A. Bernard, Teologia simbolica, Rim 1984).
a a. Od simbolov k afektom – Moderna teologija in lovekova ustva (Charles A. Bernard,
Teologia affettiva, Rim 1993).
a.a. a. Od prve obrednosti, plesa, do bogoslužja (prvine gibanja in geste Lynn Margulis, Dorion
Sagan, Mystery dance; glej tudi ital. prevod La danza misteriosa, Milano 1992).
b. Simbolna predstavitev evharistije in drugih zakramentov (Luis-Marie Chauvet, Linguaggio e
simbolo; saggio sui sacramenti, Torino 1988; Luis Marie Chauvet, Simbolo e sacramento; una rilettura
dell'esistenza christiana, Torino 1990).
3
Tega dodatka v tem natisu predavanja ni. Zamišljen je kot posebna, samostojna študija ali predavanje.
3
I. UVOD – na kratko o PSALMIH
1. Psalmi so del Pisma
e naj v tem predavanju kar na najkrajši na in nekaj to nega povem o Psalmih, moram re i,
da je to del Pisma, ki je spremljal (in še danes spremlja) ves as živo bogoslužje Izvoljenega
ljudstva, Izraela, (in spremlja tudi nas kristjane), hkrati pa je tudi nastajal v življenju Božjega
ljudstva skoraj ves as oblikovanja kanona od za etkov pa vse do poznih let po izgnanstvu –
torej hkrati z nastajanjem Stare zaveze. Strokovnjaki trde da so Psalmi dejansko nastali zaradi
bogoslužja in iz bogoslužja.4 Glede asa nastanka naj na kratko re em: Najstarejši psalmi so
nastali (v jedru) pred nastopom kraljev, zadnji pa naj bi se oblikovali potem, ko je bila
babilonska izkušnja že zgodovina.5 Seveda so psalmi v tem razvoju dobivali tudi svoje
dodatke, dostavke in preoblikovanja v skladu z izkustvi Božjega ljudstva razli nih obdobij.
Božje razodevanje je v njih, tako kot v ostalih delih Pisma, zgodovinsko tudi v tem, da
izkustvo Božjega ljudstva svetli, presvetljuje in dopolnjuje to, kar se v njem vidi in izraža.
Torej, ne govori samo Gospod, tudi Izrael govori in sodeluje v tem živem sooblikovanju.
Posebej in podrobneje se o starosti in avtorstvu Psalmov tukaj ne gre spuš ati6, saj mi gre v
tem predavanju le za predstavitveni delovni okvir.
Šli bomo nekako organsko – od vprašanja do vprašanja.
1. a. Psalmi so nastajali tudi pod vplivom širšega okolja
Izrael ni bil nikoli izoliran od svojega širšega okolja. Bogata kulturna središ a Vzhoda so v
vsej zgodovini tudi pozitivno (in negativno) vplivala nanj na vseh ravneh in asih. O tem
pri ajo številne moderne študije.
Da bi se vsaj nekoliko dotaknil tega »širšega kulturnega ozadja« bom porabil svoja dognanja,
ki sem jih že pred leti (2002) strnil v svoji razpravi o Epu o Gilgamešu in svojem pisanju o
Enuma Eliš.7
1. a. a. Velike kulture Vzhoda
Dokler kultura nima pisnih sporo il in dokler ne zna pisati, je vse njeno bogastvo, pa naj bo še
tako veliko, treba dešifrirati iz drugih ostankov in znamenj8. Po letu 3200 ali kakor nekateri
trde, po letu 3100 pred Kristusom pa so iznašli klinopis (in v Egiptu hieroglife; ta pisava se je
4
To potrjujejo tudi številne primerjalne študije o tovrstni literaturi pri sosednjih narodih. Poznani so v Feniciji
že v 13. stol pred Kr. Vendar se zdi le nekoliko pretirano prav vsem Psalmom kar direktno pripisati bogoslužno
poreklo.
5
eprav avtorstvo psalmov ni vselej nesporno, je zelo verjetno, da so taka dela nastajala v dobi prerokov, zlasti
Samuela in Davida. Bila so nekakšen izraz osebne ali ljudske pobožnosti. Te naj bi šele pozneje vklju ili v
bogoslužje.
6
O tem glej Henri Cazelles, Introduction critique a l'Ancien Testament, Pariz 1973, v poglavju 4. Ketubim
(Pisci); razdelek Psalmi.
7
Za besedila, ki jih navajam glej: Babylonia and Ancient Near Eastern Texts. Celotna zbirka
Asurbanipalove knjižnice.
8
Ta raznovrstna znamenja in posebej barvne slike (navadno v naravnih jamah) spremljajo homo sapiensa od
zadnjega Paleolitika dalje (30.000 do 10.000) dalje neprestano. Poznavalci pravijo, da imajo te podobe zlasti
magi ni pomen.
Mnogi predpostavljajo, da je že Neandertalec poznal neke vrste jezik (z vsaj 100 izrazi iz izraznimi gestami) za
tisto, kar se ni dalo konkretno pokazati. Beseda kot taka pa seveda pomeni kvalitativni preskok v
komuniciranju. Tu je potrebnih še veliko pojasnil, vendar – bodi dovolj.
4
seveda pozneje še dalje razvijala)9. Kulturno bogastvo je tako dobilo možnost, da se »vpiše
isto na druga en na in«10. Zavest o tej veš ini, sposobnosti in prednosti je tedaj isto izre no
vpisana v pisna zgodovinska poro ila. Dandanes imamo k sre i za študij na voljo na tiso e
besedil vseh razli nih kultur, sumerske, akadske, hetitske in drugih. Ogromno besedil je
transliteriranih in opremljenih z znanstvenimi komentarji. Tako je odvisnost posameznih
tekstov (kako so odvisni drug od drugega), mogo e ugotavljati na razli ne na ine. Skrbna
semanti na analiza besedil pokaže nekaj stalnosti in zakonitosti, ki nam pri tem delu zelo
pomagajo. Besedila nam postanejo bližja zlasti v tistem osnovnem sporo ilu, ki ga izredno
lepo izre e stari latinski rek: »Ni loveškega mi ne more ostati tuje.«
1.b. Sumerska kultura in literatura
Omenjeni ep O Gilgamešu je osrednje delo mezopotamske književnosti. Njegov nastanek
povezujemo z Medre jem11 s prihodom Sumercev v te kraje. Vemo, da so sem prispeli iz
Perzijskega zaliva, kamor so se naselili že okoli leta 3000 pred Kristusom.12
To izjemno sposobno in kulturno ljudstvo je v Medre ju (od 3000-2000) ustanovilo velika
mesta, ki jih poznamo pod imeni Eridu, Ur, Larsa, Uruk, Kiš, Lagaš, Isin in Nipur. Iz tega
asa so znani tudi redosledi vladarjev in asovni pregled njihovega vladanja, ki sega dale
nazaj, nekako do leta 5000 pred Kristusom.
Tu je torej tudi mesto in kultura Ur, ki ga poznamo iz SZ in Uruk, ki naj bi bil domovina
legendarnega junaka Gilgameša.
Sumerska dinastija v mestu Uruk sega nazaj do leta 2700 pred Kristusom.13 Tu so iznašli tudi
klinopis (ki so ga uporabljali Sumerci, Babilonci in Asirci in druga ljudstva, do iranske
planote).
Na žalost sumerska mesta niso dobro sodelovala med seboj; med njimi so bile neprestane
vojne in spopadi. To so bile prave mestne države, saj je mesto vklju evalo isto vse, kar je
bilo potrebno za dobro organizacijo življenja. Središ e mesta pa je bilo svetiš e z
duhovš ino, kajti mesta so bila razredno visoko diferencirana. Vladarji so (kot antipod mo i
duhovnikov) izvajali svojo oblast z razli nimi politi nimi ukrepi in reformami. Prav te
reforme zgodnjih sumerskih vladarjev (3. tiso letje pred Kristusom) so osnova stare sumerske
epike.
Sumerska kultura se je izredno dobro razvijala, kajti podnebje, obilje vode, odli ne razmere
za poljedelstvo in organizacijske sposobnosti ljudstva, gospodarska rast itn. so bile ugodne. V
teh razmerah je torej cvetela zelo razli na literatura, ki so jo poznejši Babilonci veš e vtkali v
svojo lastno kulturo in se je ohranila. Seveda v tem procesu nikakor ne gre za nekakšen
prepis zapisanega, ampak za izbor in svojsko predelavo.
Mesto Uma je znano po tem, da mu je uspelo ustanoviti prvo mestno zvezo (po zlomu
Lagaša), kar je mo države še pove alo.
V prostore Medre ja so ves as vdirali tudi semiti14; tako je vsem znan Sargon, ki mu je v
Akadiji (Kaldeja, kasneje Babilonija) uspelo, da si je Sumerce podredil skupaj z deli Elama
(dežele vzhodno od sumerskih velikih mest) in deli današnje Sirije in Male Azije. Nastane
9
Prim. Dal selce al silicio, str. 27-43. Autor analiti no raz lenjuje loveško komunikacijo, pisave in materiale za
pisanje, vse do iznajdbe alfabeta ( z 20-30 rkami), torej Mezopotamijo, Egipt, Sredozemlje. Omenja tudi
klinopisni alfabetni zapis, ki je nadgradnja starejšega zlogovnega zapisa v klinopisu. In seveda alfabetno pisavo
prakti nih Feni anov.
10
Prim. udovito delo na tem podro ju Dal selce al silicio (Od grebila (pisala, ki je razilo) do silicija), ki ga je
napisal znani izvedenec za mass media Giovanni Giovannini (2000).
11
Mezopotamija.
12
Tja so prišli iz neznane smeri.
13
Prim. odli no delo strokovnjakov z Oxforda Sumerian Dinasties.
14
Ti so skozi vso zgodovino Mezopotamije akali na ugodno priložnost za ropanje ali naselitev v tej bogati
pokrajini.
5
velika (vendar zelo raznorodna in neenotna) državna tvorba, sicer nasilno združena, vendar je
kljub vsemu imela odli ne pogoje za notranjo gospodarsko rast in kulturno menjavo. Na tako
poenotenem podro ju sedaj razli ne plasti literature in razli na izro ila krožijo v veliko
ve jem prostoru in se medsebojno bogatijo. To je izredno dobro vplivalo ne le na ohranitev in
zlivanje razli nih izro il, ampak tudi na njihovo izoblikovanje v kon nih oblikah.
Imperij Sargonove dinastije so potem, nekaj pred letom 2000, uni ili Guti.15
Po odhodu Gutov v Lagašu zavlada Gudea, v Uru pa tretja semerska dinastija in z njo
do akamo najve ji razcvet sumerske kulture. Medre je tako v resnici postane središ e za ves
Bližnji vzhod.
Nova literatura, ki je nastala ob stari, (ki je bila le delno zapisana, saj se je prej ohranjala
ve inoma ustno), je tedaj že obsegala mitološke epske spise, obredne pesmi, himne, junaško
epiko, refleksivno poezijo in druge razprave (o pravu, etiki, kmetijstvu). Vsa ta bogata
literatura, ki jo danes lahko preu ujemo16 in tako ugotavljamo sli nosti in celo literarno
odvisnost ne le biblijskih mest in spisov ampak delamo koristne vzporednice tudi z ostalimi
teksti. O tem primerjanju in ugotovitvah, ki iz tega izhajajo, so napisane številne študije.
Sumerska literatura, ki jo omenjam, je nekakšna sr ika književnosti tretjega tiso letja in z njo
se sumerska književnost zaklju uje. V Medre je so namre vdrli Amoriti17 (iz Sirije) in tu
ustanovili prvi veliki babilonski imperij.
15
Glej njihove vladarje v Sumerian Dinasties.
Glej npr. Oxforske registre besedil in transliterirane oblike s komentarji. Tiso i strani znanstveno obdelanih
besedil!
16
17
AMORITi (1800-1530 pred Kristusom). Osnovna enciklopedi na dejstva, ki jih je treba vedeti: After the last Sumerian
dynasty fell around 2000 BC, Mesopotamia drifted into conflict and chaos for almost a century. Around 1900 BC, a group of
Semites called the Amorites had managed to gain control of most of the Mesopotamian region. Like the Akkadians, the
Amorites centralized the government over the individual city-states and based their capital in the city of Babylon, which was
originally called Akkad and served as the center of the Amorite empire. For this reason, the Amorites are called the Old
Babylonians and the period of their ascendancy over the region, which lasted from 1900-1600 BC, is called the Old
Babylonian period.
The Sumerian monarchy underwent significant changes; in order to justify the enormous power the monarch enjoyed, the Old
Babylonians believed that the monarch was a god and had a divine origin. This powerful new monarchy invented new ways
to adminster the state and its resources: taxation and involuntary military service. Above all, the greatest innovation was
centralization. While the Sumerian civilization consisted of independent and autonomous city-states, the Old Babylonian
state was a behemoth of dozens of cities. In order to make this system work, power and autonomy was taken from the
individual cities and invested in the monarch. As a result, an entirely new set of laws were invented by the Old Babylonians:
laws which dealt with crimes against the state.
It is in the realm of law that the Sumerian state was most dramatically changed by the Amorites. While law among the
Sumerians was administered jointly by individuals and the state, the Old Babylonians allowed the state to more actively
pursue and punish criminals. The punishments became dramatically more draconian: the death penalty was applied to many
more crimes, including "bad behavior in a bar."
The Code of Hammurabi
Perhaps the most important legal text in history is an Old Babylonian code of laws written by Hammurabi (around 17921750 BC), the most famous of the Old Babylonian monarchs. This code, called the Code of Hammurabi (I wonder why?) is
generally regarded as Sumerian in spirit, but with all the harshness of the Old Babylonian penalties.
Although we know nothing of Old Babylonian religion, they seem to have adopted whole-cloth the religion of the Sumerians.
We do know that the Amorites lived in close contact with the Sumerians for a long time preceding their ascendency over the
region, so it's possible that they gradually adopted Sumerian religion over several centuries. The Amorites did, however,
import a new god into Sumerian religion, Marduk, which they elevated to the supreme position over the other gods. Like the
Sumerians, the Amorites did not believe that life after death held any promise or threat, so like the Sumerians, Amorite
religion ruthlessly focssed on this world.
Gilgamesh
Among the great literary achievements of the Old Babylonians was the compilation of a series of Sumerian stories surround
the legendary king of Uruk, Gilgamesh. This collection tells how this king destroyed the demon of the Lebanese cedar
forests, defied the gods, and discovered the secret of the flood and its survivor. The Assyrian version of the collection is part
of your reading assignments.
6
1. c. Babilonci in nadaljnje zlivanje in dopolnjevanje izro il in besedil
Bogato babilonsko obdobje je prineslo vrsto novih dosežkov na mnogih podro jih. Skoraj vsi
se iz zgodovine spomnimo velikega vladarja iz tega obdobja, Hamurabija in njegovega
znanega Zakonika.18 V njem vidimo prvo zbirko apodikti nega in kazuisti nega prava, ki je
kasneje tvorno vplivala na nastanek biblijskih besedil (»deset besed«, to je deset zapovedi) in
drugih pravnih uredb, zlasti v nekaterih knjigah Pisma (in nekaterih plasteh, ki se v njih
ohranjajo kot izro ila (Jahvist, Elohist, Duhovniški kodeksi) .
Zakonik lepo kaže, kako so semiti hitro osvojili stare civilizacijske dosežke s kulturo vred. Iz
njega lahko, ob pregledovanju ostale literature tega obdobja, veliko zvemo o življenju in
na inih življenja in razmišljanja v tem obdobju.
Mesta tega velikega podro ja pa seveda niso bila vsa enako razvita in enako pomembna.Med
mesti Medre ja se je sedaj posebej izkazalo mesto Babilon. Najve ji razcvet Babilonske
velesile zaznamo med leti 1900 do 1600 pred Kristusom, eprav je njihove mo ve krat
pojemala in se spet obnavljala.19
Babilonci so iz starega sumera vzeli vse, kar so rabili. To na elo je nekaj izjemnega in
koristnega. Kar zadeva literaturo vidimo, kako so mitološke in druge predstave starih
prilagajali z svojimi. Enako velja tudi za razne legende, obredne pesmi in ostalo literaturo.
Babilonec je torej vse sprejemal skozi sito uporabnosti. Vse pa je služilo mo i Imperija.
Presenetljivo!
Z literarnega stališ a predstavlja to obdobje svojevrstni amalgam, ki je lažje vplival na ostale
narode.
18
Prolog Hamurabijevega Zakonika (angleški prevod):
-When Anu the Sublime, King of the Anunaki, and Bel, the lord of Heaven and earth, who decreed the fate of the land, assigned to Marduk,
the over-ruling son of Ea, God of righteousness, dominion over earthly man, and made him great among the Igigi, they called Babylon by his
illustrious name, made it great on earth, and founded an everlasting kingdom in it, whose foundations are laid so solidly as those of heaven
and earth; then Anu and Bel called by name me, Hammurabi, the exalted prince, who feared God, to bring about the rule of righteousness in
the land, to destroy the wicked and the evil-doers; so that the strong should not harm the weak; so that I should rule over the black-headed
people like Shamash, and enlighten the land, to further the well-being of mankind.
Hammurabi, the prince, called of Bel am I, making riches and increase, enriching Nippur and Dur-ilu beyond compare, sublime patron of Ekur; who reestablished Eridu and purified the worship of E-apsu; who conquered the four quarters of the world, made great the name of
Babylon, rejoiced the heart of Marduk, his lord who daily pays his devotions in Saggil; the royal scion whom Sin made; who enriched Ur;
the humble, the reverent, who brings wealth to Gish-shir-gal; the white king, heard of Shamash, the mighty, who again laid the foundations
of Sippara; who clothed the gravestones of Malkat with green; who made E-babbar great, which is like the heavens, the warrior who guarded
Larsa and renewed E-babbar, with Shamash as his helper; the lord who granted new life to Uruk, who brought plenteous water to its
inhabitants, raised the head of E-anna, and perfected the beauty of Anu and Nana; shield of the land, who reunited the scattered inhabitants of
Isin; who richly endowed E-gal-mach; the protecting king of the city, brother of the god Zamama; who firmly founded the farms of Kish,
crowned E-me-te-ursag with glory, redoubled the great holy treasures of Nana, managed the temple of Harsag-kalama; the grave of the
enemy, whose help brought about the victory; who increased the power of Cuthah; made all glorious in E-shidlam, the black steer, who gored
the enemy; beloved of the god Nebo, who rejoiced the inhabitants of Borsippa, the Sublime; who is indefatigable for E-zida; the divine king
of the city; the White, Wise; who broadened the fields of Dilbat, who heaped up the harvests for Urash; the Mighty, the lord to whom come
scepter and crown, with which he clothes himself; the Elect of Ma-ma; who fixed the temple bounds of Kesh, who made rich the holy feasts
of Nin-tu; the provident, solicitous, who provided food and drink for Lagash and Girsu, who provided large sacrificial offerings for the
temple of Ningirsu; who captured the enemy, the Elect of the oracle who fulfilled the prediction of Hallab, who rejoiced the heart of Anunit;
the pure prince, whose prayer is accepted by Adad; who satisfied the heart of Adad, the warrior, in Karkar, who restored the vessels for
worship in E-ud-gal-gal; the king who granted life to the city of Adab; the guide of E-mach; the princely king of the city, the irresistible
warrior, who granted life to the inhabitants of Mashkanshabri, and brought abundance to the temple of Shidlam; the White, Potent, who
penetrated the secret cave of the bandits, saved the inhabitants of Malka from misfortune, and fixed their home fast in wealth; who
established pure sacrificial gifts for Ea and Dam-gal-nun-na, who made his kingdom everlastingly great; the princely king of the city, who
subjected the districts on the Ud-kib-nun-na Canal to the sway of Dagon, his Creator; who spared the inhabitants of Mera and Tutul; the
sublime prince, who makes the face of Ninni shine; who presents holy meals to the divinity of Nin-a-zu, who cared for its inhabitants in their
need, provided a portion for them in Babylon in peace; the shepherd of the oppressed and of the slaves; whose deeds find favor before
Anunit, who provided for Anunit in the temple of Dumash in the suburb of Agade; who recognizes the right, who rules by law; who gave
back to the city of Ashur its protecting god; who let the name of Ishtar of Nineveh remain in E-mish-mish; the Sublime, who humbles
himself before the great gods; successor of Sumula-il; the mighty son of Sin-muballit; the royal scion of Eternity; the mighty monarch, the
sun of Babylon, whose rays shed light over the land of Sumer and Akkad; the king, obeyed by the four quarters of the world; Beloved of
Ninni, am I. When Marduk sent me to rule over men, to give the protection of right to the land, I did right and righteousness in . . . , and
brought about the well-being of the oppressed.
19
Babilonci so bili veliki pragmatisti. Prejšnje kulture so sprejemali v toliko, kolikor so jim služile. Omenjeni ep
O Gilgamešu je poizkus Babiloncev, da bi intelektualni smetani svojega asa odgovorili na vsa klju na vprašanja
bivanja, tako: o posmrtnosti, o stvarjenju vsega in loveka, o odnosu do usode, do bogov itd.
7
Znano je, da je bil sredi drugega tiso letja babilonski imperij uni en. To so storili HETITI
(angl. Hittites)20. O njih posebej ne morem govoriti, vendar naj poudarim, da so ti dodatno
vplivali na širjenje kulturnega kroga teh podro ij, saj so uspeli povezati z doslej omenjenimi
podro ji tudi Egipt, Fenicijo in stari Kanaan – torej podro ja, ki jih iz Biblije dobro poznamo.
Mezopotamska kultura je tako vdrla tudi v severne predele Sirije in severna Feni anska mesta
(Ugarit). Pospešili so torej stikanje teh kulturnih izro il.
Od tega obdobja dalje bodo stiki med temi razli nimi podro ji stalni, saj je bil babilonski
jezik diplomatski jezik vsega podro ja. Zgodovinska dejstva o tem so bogato izpri ana iz
razli nih ostalin (Tell Amarna).
Tak primer kulturnih mešanih vplivov je seveda tudi hebrejska književnost.21 Del te v
današnjem predavanju obravnavam kot Psalme.
1. d. Asirsko obdobje in njegov doprinos; Medijci in Perzijci
V Medre ju v tem obdobju zraste vpliv velikega mesta Ninive, ki ga poznamo tudi iz Biblije.
Vse je kazalo, da bo to podro je utonilo v kaosu, ko so Asirci tu prevzeli prevlado in
ustanovili nov imperij. Ninive so tako zopet prevzele vodilno vlogo in nadaljevalo
mezopotamsko kulturno tradicijo.
Vladar, ki ga pravtako poznamo (iz biblije) je Asurbanipal22 (pribl. 668-627 pred Kristusom).
Posebno vlogo v tem kulturnem procesu igra poznana Asurbanipalova knjižnica,23 ki v sedmem
20
Slovensko zapisovanje imen in transliteracije so seveda svojski problem. Navadno je pri nas uzakonjeno tisto
zapisovanje, ki je napa no (samo pomislite na ime Nabuhodonozor ali Ehnaton). In take napake (zlasti pri
imenih vladarjev) so – vsaj meni – velikokrat zelo mote e. Vedno si mislim, sedaj bom spet narobe zapisal to
ime, eprav natanko vem, kako glasi njegova transliteracija, vendar...
21
Hebrejci so se izselili iz Ura – torej so bili že na samem za etku del bogate Urske kulture. To se je zgodilo
pred 1850 pred Kristusom. Ur je namre domovina Tareja in Abrahama. Naselili so se v Kanaanu (sredi visoke
mestne kanaanske kulture). Njihova kultura, kot dokazujejo besedila, je na nek na in torej odvisna od
mezopotamske in egiptovske kulturne dediš ine. Odvisnost pa seveda ne pomeni prepis in popolno odvisnost.
Hebrejska literatura vsekakor pomeni svojsko sintezo in nadgradnjo v kulturnem in verskem pomenu. Poseben
vpliv pri tem imajo seveda preroki.
Enako velja tudi za Hetite, ki razvijajo svojo sintezo.
22
Tudi »AŠURBANIPAL«.
23
O tem beremo ( primerjaj enciklopedi na dejstva v Ashurbanipal Library): King Ashurbanipal (ca. 668-627
B.C.) was the ruler of ancient Assyria at the height of Assyrian military and cultural accomplishments. He is
known in Greek writings as Sardanapalus and as Asnappeer or Osnapper in the Bible. Through military
conquests Ashurbanipal also expanded Assyrian territory and its number of vassal states. However, of far greater
importance to posterity was Ashurbanipal's establishment of a great library in the city of Nineveh. The military
and territorial gains made by this ruler barely outlived him but the Library he established has survived partially
intact. A collection of 20,000 to 30,000 cuneiform tablets containing approximately 1,200 distinct texts remains
for scholars to study today. Ashurbanipal's library was not the first library of its kind but it was one of the largest
and one of the ones to survive to the present day. Most of it is now in the possession of the British Museum or
the Iraq Department of Antiquities. The importance of Ashurbanipal's Library can not be overstated. It was
buried by invaders centuries before the famous library at Alexandria was established and gives modern historians
much information about the peoples of the Ancient Near East. The ancient Sumerian "Epic of Gilgamesh" and a
nearly complete list of ancient Near Eastern rulers among other priceless writings were preserved in
Ashurbanipal's palace library at Nineveh. Ashurbanipal's accomplishments are also of great importance to
scholars of library history. As a scholar Ashurbanipal reached greatnesss. Though this library was not the first of
its kind, it was one of the largest and the first library modern scholars can document as having most or even all
of the attributes one expects to find in a modern library. Like a modern library this collection was spread out into
many rooms according to subject matter. Some rooms were devoted to history and government, others to religion
and magic and still others to geography, science, poetry, etc. Ashurbanipal's collection even held what could be
called classified government materials. The findings of spies and secret affairs of state were held secure from
access in deep recesses of the palace much like a modern government archive. Each group of tablets contained a
brief citation to identify the contents and each room contained a tablet near the door to classify the general
contents of each room in Ashurbanipal's library. The actual cataloging activities under Ashurbanipal's direction
would not be seen in Europe for centuries. Partially through military conquests and partially through the
8
stoletju pred Kristusom združuje vse tedanje mezopotamsko literarno bogastvo24, saj naj bi
tedaj štela 30.000 literarnih enot. Danes poznamo ve kot 1200 literarnih enot te knjižnice, ki
so delno ali skoraj v celoti ohranjene. Naj poudarim, da je bila knjižnica urejena tako, da tak
red še danes predstavlja moderen na in urejanja knjižnice. Ni novega torej pod soncem!
Novo obdobje v pokrajini Medre ja predstavlja obdobje Medijske vladavine, ko je naval
Medijcev in Babiloncev leta 612 razrušil Ninive, »mesto treh dni hoda« kot pravi Pismo,
vendar so se le ti morali umakniti Perzijcem, ki so od 6. do 4. stoletja sprejeli, ohranjali in
razvijali dediš ino Asircev in ustvarjali svojo visoko kulturo.
To je - hkrati - tudi tisto obdobje, ko Izrael sme zapustiti Babilon (Babilonska sužnost in se
vrniti na svoja ognjiš a) in se stare kulture, ki jih doslej omenjam, sre ajo s kulturnim svetom
Grkov.
Visok vpliv mezopotamske kulture25 tako v Gr iji povzro i silen razcvet helenske kulture, ki
je bila prišla v stik tudi z Egiptom. S helenizmom in Aleksandrom Velikim (ki seže do Inda in
tamkajšnjih kultur), pa se vse to bogastvo že steguje tudi proti Evropi in se pripravlja za nov
kulturni vzpon grško-krš anskega sveta.
Tako smo zaklju ili ves kulturni krog in svojsko zgodovinsko dinamiko ter pokazali na vse
vplive kulturnega ozadja, ki je pogojilo tudi bibli na besedila in z njimi seveda tudi naše
Psalme.
Da bi torej vsaj za silo razumeli tudi ta background-ozadnje Psalmov, moramo se i dale
nazaj.
1. e. Nekaj bibli nih vzporednic z mezopotamsko26 književnostjo
1. e. 1. Utnapištimov odgovor Gilgamešu27
Neizbežna je bridka smrt.
Mar sploh kdaj gradimo hišo za vekomaj?
Mar na veke sklepamo pogodbe?
Mar si bratje za vekomaj delijo imetje?
Mar trajajo prepiri v deželi za vekomaj?
employment of numerous scribes there was significant effort placed into what modern librarians would call
collection development.
Thus, centuries before the library at Alexandria, a library with many of the characteristics of a modern institution
was in existence. Scholars of library history would be well served by further study of Ashurbanipal and his
palace library. Further information on Ashurbanipal and his military and literary accomplishments may be found
at the Assyria Web Page. Information about the ancient city of Nineveh can be found at the Nineveh page. To see
some pictures of surviving objects from the era students might stop at The Assyrians Web Page. A good chronology to place the history of
Assyria into context can be found at this chronology page.
24
Zelo veliko je napisanega o bogastvu te knjižnice. Izdelani so celotni registri vsega pisnega bogastva.
Primerjaj Oxford: Ashurbanipal's Library. Ashurbanipal Great First Librarian in podobno.
25
Mezopotamsko ali Medre no književnost delimo v dve veliki skupini: mitološko in dvorno. Kot sem omenil
gre za razli ne skupine, kot so krajše pesnitve in zapise (razli nih literarnih zvrsti, kot so eroti ne, himni ne,
religioznein pregovorne zvrsti), epske pesnitve (sumerske epske pesmi, mitološke epske pesnitve, junaški ep o
Gilgamešu) in razprave.
Mitološka literatura obsega krajše pesmi (didakti ne, spovedne, obredne, eroti ne, himni ne) in daljše epske
pesnitve (mitološke epe). Med mitološke epe spada Ep o Stvarjenju sveta ( Ko nebo visoko zgoraj še ni imelo
imena) ali Enuma Eliš. Prav tako poznamo izredno lep ep O odhodu (boginje)Ištar v podzemlje. Ep o boginji
Agušaji, Ep o Etani, Ep o Adapi itd. (Vsi ti epi so transliterirani in prevedeni v angleški jezik in opremljeni z
znanstvenim semanti nim komentarjem).
26
e re em »mezopotamsko«, potem govorim o razli nih književnostih (razli nih obdobjih) na celotnem
podro ju Medre ja.
27
Moj prevod transliteriranega originala. Za osnovo mi služi omenjeno Oxfordsko besedilo.
9
Mar Reka na veke naraš a in povzro a poplavo?
In ka ji pastir odlaga svojo li inko,
da bi njeno kožo gledali son ni žarki –
Obraza, ki bi mogel gledati soncu v o i,
ni ga bilo in ga ne bo nikoli...
Že od za etka sveta ni stalnosti in je ni.
Spe i in mrtvi – kako sta si podobna med sabo!
Mar ni na obrazih obeh upodobljena ista smer?
Naj bo lovek preprost, naj bi bil imenitnega rodu,
tako je, odkar je Enlil28 blagoslovil loveški rod:
Kadar se loveku izpolni njegova (dolo enost)
in izpusti stražar pri vratih podzemlja
njegovo dušo na beli dan,
tedaj se zberejo anuki, bogovi vzvišeni, na posvet
in tedaj Mametum, ki kroji usodo,
skupaj z njimi odredi ( loveku) pot.
Dodeli mu življenje in smrt.
Toda smrt – njen datum je vsem nepoznan...
(Nekatere vzporednice tega besedila lahko najdemo z bibli nim Psalmom 1 – Dvojna pot)29
1. e. 2. Job in bližnje besedilo iz sumerskega obdobja30
(Sumersko besedilo)31
lovek sem, prosvetljen lovek;
zakaj ta, ki me spoštuje propada?
Moja resnicoljubna beseda je tako spremenjena v laž...
Ko sem vstopal v hišo, je otemnel moj razum.
Ko sem, lovek, stopil na cesto
je bilo moje srce vznemirjeno.
Proti meni se je z jezo obrnil moj zvesti pastir,
kot da bi postal moj sovražnik.
Moj pastir je snoval zoper mene zle naklepe,
eprav sploh nisem (bil) njegov sovražnik –
Moj prijatelj ni ne pove niti besedice po pravici.
Prebrisano snuje proti meni.
Ti pa, Bog moj, temu ne nasprotuješ...
Zakaj sem, MODRI, z mladimi nevednimi izena en (v družbi)?
Zakaj mene, prosvetljenca, štejejo med nevedneže?
Hrane je povsod okoli,
vendar je lakota moja edina hrana...
Ti »zakaj« se nizajo tudi v Jobovi knjigi, neprestano. Enako zani evanje doleteva bibli nega
Joba spri o njegovih modrih in najbližjih (celo njegove soproge: »Prekolni Boga in umri...«).
»Toda Job se ni pregrešil nad Gospodom«, beremo.
28
Boštvo.
Primerjal Oxforsko študijo Ep o Gilgamešu. Spremno besedilo in opombe.
30
To besedilo razmišlja o tem, kako more pravi nega doleteti nesre a in trpljenje, (ki bi bilo razumljivo za
krivi nega). Pravi ni namre izpolnjuje Božjo voljo.
31
Moj prevod iz transliteriranega zlogovnega originala (angleška oxf. izdaja). Nekaj besedil je dostopnih v
transliterirani obliki celo na internetnih naslovih te univerze.
29
10
1. e. 3. Vzporednica sumerskega besedila s Psalmom 91, Božje razodevanje v nevihti
Sumersko (akadsko) besedilo32poje:
- e se Gospod jezi,
se trese nebo pred njim.
e se Gospod jezi,
se trese zemlja pred njim.
Visoko gorovje
se ruši pred njim.
Pred njegovo srditostjo,
pred njegovo silno jezo.
Pred njegovim zamolklim bu anjem,
pred njegovim bobnenjem
so se nebeški gbogovi vrnili v nebo
in se zemeljski vrnili v podzemlje;
sonce je (bilo) zašlo
izza temeljev nebesa.
Zginil je mesec
nekam v nebeško brezkrajnost.
(Nekaj ve o vzporednicah glej v nadaljevanju besedila v III. delu tega predavanja)
Bodi dovolj. S temi besedili sem želel samo nadahniti obstoje e ozadje po vsebinah, ki jih
poznamo v Psalmih.
2. Psalmi so svojevrstne pesmi, vendar predstavljajo nekakšen vrh in svojski teološki
povzetek33 Starega testamenta. V teh pesmih so povzeta, zapeta in v dušo vtisnjena najbolj
pre iš ena spoznanja o Bogu, loveku in svetu – in to tako, da je vse to en sam spev in
nagovor Boga in lovekov odgovor, živ dialog med obema. Nobeno življenjsko izkustvo ni
izpuš eno, nobeno loveško ustvo zanemarjeno: tu je krik, tu agonija, tu obup – tu vesela
pesem, rajanje, vzhik slavljenja in poveli evanja, tu tožba, jadikovanje in potrtost, tu novo
upanje in novo videnje... ves lovek in ves Bog sta tukaj, e tako re em.34
Na nek na in tudi lahko re emo, da je Psalterij nekakšno ogledalo ljudske pobožnosti, kakor
jo tudi sicer kažejo tudi druge knjige Pisma (Knjige sodnikov, Samuelove knjige, 3. in 4.
Mojzesove knjige, Kroniške knjige). Vidimo namre , kako Psalmi izražajo globino ljudske
duše, po drugi strani pa nas presene a tudi tisto, kar je temu sledilo iz duhovniških obredov.
Seveda, naj pripomnim, prvi Psalmi ta bogoslužni okvir tudi dale presegajo (posebej tam,
kjer govore o globokem verskem izkustvu, molitvah in osebni pobožnosti. Tudi dandanes
imajo svojo silno vrednost v osebni molitvi in javnem judovskem in krš anskem bogoslužju.
Krš anstvo kot svetovna religija je ravno v živem bogoslužju najgloblje povezano z
judovstvom (Stara zaveza in Psalmi posebej).35
32
Moj prevod transliteriranega zlogovnega originala (angl. OXF. izdaja).
Pri tem moramo seveda upoštevati kontinuiteto nauka; teologija posameznih delov svetega pisma je pa v
celoti podvržena razvoju. Sestavljati tako teologijo kar na pamet, brez zgodovinskega redosleda, je verjetno zelo
pomanjkljivo.
34
Ta zna ilna ob utja Psalmov seveda niso nek moj umislek ampak soglasno dopovedovanje najve jih
strokovnjakov na tem podro ju. Literature, ki je o tem na voljo – je za cele biblioteke.
35
Seveda ne smemo misliti, da je krš anstvo kar tako »prepisalo« Psalme. Kako krš anstvo zgodovinsko gleda
nanje je treba podrobneje pogledati. Kako izgledajo v Hieronimovem prevodu vemo. Kako razli no nanje gleda
že poapostolska doba in cerkveni o etje in vseh težav s tem v zvezi, tu ne bom našteval. Nedvomno je, da so
Psalmi kot besedilo vir povezanosti in loveške vesoljnosti, ki je nadvse dragocena - in kot taki ponotranjen vir
ustvarjanja skupnosti. Posebno vrednost v tem smislu ima tudi stalna prisotnost simbolov v njih.
33
11
V tem predavanju seveda ne morem posebej govoriti o vlogi Psalmov v pravi krš anski (in
judovski) pobožnosti. Vendar bi vsak kristjan moral vedeti, da je to del zanj neobhodne in
zdrave duhovnosti, ki dale presega vsako krš ansko popevkarstvo in »easy liturgy«, ki se mi
upira.36 Izraznost psalmov je celostna in celovita; je vizualizirana, polna metafor, znamenj,
simbolov, ki govorijo na razli nih nivojih jezika. Tu je v pesmi prikazano isto vse, kar se
vtiskuje v loveka in kar ga dolo a in vse tisto, kar nikakor ne more vanj, kar kot slutnja
ostaja zunaj, kar straši in tudi tisto, kar vliva upanje in ljubezen.
Misli in ustva so presežna ne le v sebi, ampak tudi v tem, kar je izpovedano znotraj simbolov
in razli nih pesniških semitskih struktur, ki so zelo razli ne od našega grško-krš anskega
strukturiranja. Vedeti moramo, da poznajo notranjo rimo, da vnašajo gibanje telesa, ki
razgibava duha in v gesti podaljšuje besedo in njene pomene, v simbolu pa sega od osnovnih
podzavestnih struktur, ki dolo ajo naše mišljenje in povezujejo naše podzavestne temelje s
prastarimi izkustvi in s tem, kar je možno samo sanjati (in kar še ni in ne bo v celoti
udejanjeno v trenutku zgodovine, ki ga živimo).
3. Bolj kot ostala besedila, te pesmi »zapojejo« Besedo.
Psalmi kažejo, kako se Božje ljudstvo odziva na Božjo besedo in Božje vzrokovanje v
zgodovini. Dejansko lahko razlo imo kako posameznim odlomkom besedila, ki govorijo o
tem in onem Božjem dejanju, ustreza tudi svojska prepesnitev v posameznem Psalmu.
Samo nekaj naj jih naštejem:
Stvarjenje – Psalm 104
lovek in njegova izbranost (Gen 1, 26 sl.) – Ps 8
Bog je SVET (Iz 6) – Ps 99
Božja roka nad morjem (Ex 13- 15) in Psalm 66
Veli astna Božja dela na Sionu (2 Sam 6) in Psalm 48
Mesija kot Trpe i in udarjeni (Iz 53) in Ps 22.37
Seveda je to ustvarjanje mnogokrat med seboj premešano. Poro ilo izhoda je vsekakor živo in
slikovito, vendar se te podobe takoj spremene tudi v pesem, ki potem odjekuje dalje, v
Psalme. Pismo pravi (Ex, 15, 1 sl.):
»Tedaj so Mojzes in Izraelovi sinovi peli Gospodu tole pesem:
Pel bom Gospodu, ker je silno vzvišen;
konja in jezdeca je treš il v morje.
Gospod je moja mo in moja pesem,
36
Na žalost je tega »liturgi nega nastopaštva« pri naših liturgijah v Sloveniji mnogo preve . Ponekod celo
presega vsak okus in zdravo mero. Na žalost. Seveda je tako po etje v nasprotju s cerkvenimi predpisi, ki veljajo
za bogoslužje in kaže na veliko neznanje, ki pri nas vlada na tem podro ju. S stališ a komunikacije, semantike
gest in vsega ostalega, kar nam je na voljo, so take napake nedopustne. Bogoslužje ni »doma a kuhinja«, kjer se
po kuhinjsko dobro po utimo in tudi ni zgolj javno nastopanje, kjer pa veljajo okviri za tako nastopanje, eprav
so tam povsem zadostni in zadovoljivi. Simbolnost gest in znamenj ima pri bogoslužju svojo doslednost in zato
svojske zakonitosti. Teologija samega bogoslužja pa dejansko sega do osnovne duhovnosti vsakega kristjana
posebej, ki v »bogoslužju daje ast Bogu« in od njega prejema »vse dobrine«; v njej se duhovnik in božji narod
»posve uje z opravljanjem svetih skrivnosti«. Do osnovne duhovnosti kristjana sega – ne do dobrega po utja,
kjer – oprostite mojemu izrazu – z debelo ritjo udobno sedimo in se v zakurjenem cerkvenem prostoru dobro
po utimo, »da tako maša prej mine.« Lepo vas prosim! (O tem ve v mojem predavanju: Naše sveto bogoslužje
in nastopanje v njem iz leta 2002). Ves sem divji ob taki nevednosti!
37
Tudi tu glej: Henri Cazelles, Introduction critique a l'Ancien Testament, Pariz 1973, v poglavju 4. Ketubim;
Psalmi (Posamezne analize).
12
bil mi je rešitev.
To je moj Bog;
zato ga bom hvalil,
Bog mojega o eta poveli eval ga bom.
Gospod je bojevnik;
ime mu je Jahve.
Faraonove vozove in njegovo vojsko je
pahnil v morje;
njegovi izbrani astniki so utonili v
Trsti nem morju.
Zagrnili so jih valovi;
potopili so se v globino kakor kamen.
Tvoja desnica se bleš i od mo i,
Gospod, tvoja desnica drobi sovražnika...38
Psalm 66 pa to veli astno dramo rešitve prikazuje druga e.
Takole poje:
Vzklikaj Bogu, vsa zemlja,
pojte slavo njegovega imena,
dajte slavo v njegovi hvalnici.
Recite Bogu: »Kako strašna so tvoja dela!
Zaradi obilice tvoje mogo nosti
se ti prilizujejo sovražniki.
Vsa zemlja pada pred teboj na kolena,
prepevajo ti, prepevajo tvojemu imenu.
Pridite in glejte Božja dejanja,
strašen je pri delu s loveškimi otroci.
Morje je spremenil v kopno,
peš so šli ez vodo...
Slavite ljudstva našega Boga,
dajte, da se sliši glas njegove hvalnice.
On nas je ohranil pri življenju
in ni dal, da bi naša noga omahovala...39
4. Kako Judje razdelijo Psalme ?
Kako bi jih druga e razdelili, kakor v število prstov na eni roki, na PET delov, kakor je tudi
Torah razdeljena na pet knjig!
Razdelijo jih torej takole:
I. Ps 1-42
II. 42-72
III. 73-89
38
Povsem napa no bi bilo misliti, da gre v teh besedilih za neko izrazito krutost. Vedeti moramo, da so Judje
»povsem zadovoljno« živeli tudi v Egiptu, v Aleksandriji in zato »Egipt« tukaj pomeni simbolni Egipt. »But the
symbolic Egypt is not history«, pravi upravi eno Northrop Frye (cit. delo stran 49). Prav tako bi mogli re i za
zgodovinsko in simbolno izkustvo o Babilonu (»Ob rekah Babilona smo sedeli in jokali...« - »Al naharim
Babel...«).
39
Prevod teh besedil se nekoliko razlikuje od SSP, kot vidite.
13
IV. 90-106
V. 107-15040
5. Kdaj pa je Psalterij dobil dosedanjo podobo? Celota Psalmov, to je Psalterij, se je
po asi zlivala skupaj. To je bil dolg proces. Najve ji med u enjaki se strinjajo, da ta celota
dobila nekako sedanjo podobo v asu po izgnanstvu (konec babilonske sužnosti-obdobje smo
že omenili). Zgodovinski razlog za to je bil notranje poenotenje ljudstva v tem kriti nem
trenutku. Tedaj sta namre Nehemija iz Ezdra obnavljata živo skupnost Izraela, ki je morala
imeti dušo, to je živo bogoslužje, in zato tudi pesem tega bogoslužja, Psalme. Potreba sama
jih je torej zbrala skupaj, v enovit del, pridružen ostali Božji besedi.41
Kadar tako zgoš eno govorim, se bojim, da bi moji poslušalci mislili, da so te stvari silno
preproste. Zgoš enost, ki jo rabim je zgolj pedagoška. Tako jo morate razumeti.
6. Stara protestantska ekzegeza in literarne vrste
eprav z današnjega stališ a zelo kriti no presojamo to, kar so na podro ju eksegez naredili
stari protestantski u enjaki (R. Karl Bultmann42 in drugi; nasprotujem predvsem njegovi
demitologizaciji, ki je s sedanjega stališ a semantik za presojo besedil in zlasti današnjega
vedenja o mitih in njihovi funkciji v besedilih43, postala povsem nezadostna in nevzdržna!),
pa vendar za njimi še vedno ponavljamo teorijo literarnih vrst. Ta ekzegetski pristop želi z
razli ni znanstvenimi metodami ugotoviti razli ne literarne vrste psalmov. Tako, pod temi
vidiki Psalme razdeljujemo (v skladu z najve jimi poznavalci, ki se med seboj bistveno ne
razlikujejo) po njihovih osnovnih literarnih izraznostih44:
1.HIMNE, ki pojejo Božjo slavo v odrešitvenih dogodkih, v stvarjenjskem delu.
2. Zelo podobni so jim BOGOJAVLJENSKI psalmi (teofanije Boga) – tako psalma 18 in
29. Silna je mo gospodova. Bog se oglaša z najve jimi silami narave...
40
Henri Cazelles, Introduction critique a l'Ancien Testament, Pariz 1973, (v poglavju 4. Ketubim; Psalmi.
Judovska razdelitev).
41
Henri Cazelles, Introduction critique a l'Ancien Testament, Pariz 1973, (v poglavju 4. Ketubim; Psalmi.
Starost Psalmov).
42
Ne da bi podcenjeval njegovo znanstveno delo, moram o njem re i (z Enc. Th.): Bultmann,
Rudolf Karl , 1884–1976, German existentialist theologian, educated at the universities of Tübingen, Berlin,
and Marburg. He taught at the universities of Breslau and Giessen and from 1921 to 1950 was professor at the
Univ. of Marburg. Strongly influenced by the existentialist philosophy of Martin Heidegger, Bultmann is best
known for his work on the New Testament, which he reduced—with the exception of the Passion—to basic elements
of myth, which then have application to contemporary concerns. His approach is termed “demythologization”and
"form criticism," of which Bultmann has been the most influential exponent:
"The aim of form-criticism is to determine the original form of a piece of narrative, a dominical saying or a parable. In the
process we learn to distinguish secondary additions and forms, and these in turn lead to important results for the history of the
tradition." His classic work is Theology of the New Testament (tr. 1951). Other writings in English translation
include Essays, Philosophical and Theological (1952, tr. 1955), Primitive Christianity in its Contemporary
Setting (1949, tr. 1963), Jesus and the World (1951, tr. 1958), The Gospel of John (1953, tr. 1971), The History
of the Synoptic Tradition (1957, 2d ed. tr. 1968); see also his selected shorter writings, Existence and Faith (tr.
1960); studies by E. T. Lang (1968), Walter Schmithals (tr. 1968), and André Malet (tr. 1969).
43
Prim. mesta o Mitu, Jeziku in Metafori v Northrop Frye, The Great Code. Prim. tudi odli ne prispevke o tem
v študijah Hans Georga Gadamerja, Mythos und Vernuft, Mythos und Logos v njegovih Zbranih delih, osmi
zvezek. Posebej glej tudi v slov. prevodu Izbrani spisi (Nova Revija, Phainomena) 101-107.
44
Tu se držim povsem ustaljene razdelitve, ki jo navajajo vsi ve ji francoski in angleški priro niki svoje
biblioteke.
14
3. Teofanijam blizu so tudi Sionske pesmi, ki so iz gore Sinaj prešle na Sion (Ps 46, 48, 76,
84, 87, 125. Gospod je Sion zbral za svoje razodevanje (bivališ e). Blizu je svojemu
ljudstvu. Sion je sti iš e vseh poti; sem božje ljudstvo roma, tu ga najde, tu ga hvali. Tu se
razodeva kot SIMBOL božje zaš ite; tu se simbolno oblikujejo vse sodbe prihodnjega
veka (ta eshata).
4. Himnam sorodne so tudi pesmi, kjer je Gospod-Kralj (bogokraljevske pesmi). Sem
nedvomno sodijo Psalmi 47, 93, 96, 98, 99. V tej je zajeta vsa zgodovina od stvarjenja
do prihodnjega veka (eshaton) – vsa razodeva Božjo suverenost, to je Kraljevanje.
5. Pesmi tožba ali žalostinke so naslednja literarna zvrst. Teh je kar precej. Previdni
moramo biti pri razlaganju množinskega »jaz«, ki je sicer izpri an kot žalostinka
posameznika, vendar je težko re i, da se ne nanaša na izkustvo celega naroda (oz. loveka).
Žalost prinaša no , Gospod pa svojo razsodbo – po mnenju Izraelcev – zjutraj, v Templju, ko
vzide sonce...
Te pesmi so sestavljenje iz tožbe same, žalosti in najglobljih ob utkov, ki jim navadno sledi
vera in izpoved upanja in obi ajno tudi zahvala. Ti Psalmi so: 3, 17, 27, 63.
Seveda ravno v teh pesmih zasledimo tudi najve je tarnanje nad Bogom samim: Nisi me
slišal, zavrgel si me, ne poslušaš me...
Vendar, je samo Bog kriv? Kaj pa jaz? Sem tudi jaz v em zgrešil; kaj napa nega storil?
Spokorni psalmi pravijo prav to: Ob utim krivdo, leži nad mano... moje izkustvo je izkustvo
no i... ne morem ga pozabiti...! Taka sta med drugimi tudi Psalma 51 in 130; in še 6, 32,
38, 102, 143.
Vendar, lovek tudi zaupa – zato pesmi zaupanja. V njih lovek in njegovo srce: »Povsem
se ti izro am... Gospod.«
6. Zahvalne pesmi (hodah). Se znate zahvaljevati? Res? Se vedno zahvalite? Lepo vas
prosim, pojdite v psalme zahvale... Stopajte vanje » z veselim glasom«, » z bobni in rajalnim
plesom«, »stopimo pred Njegovo obli je...«, »zahvaljujmo se Gospodu, ker je dober«. »Ves
dober je Gospod, ves usmiljen.«
Dragi moji, ob zahvali notranje rastemo. Od predmetov v naši roki, rastemo do tistega, ki nam
je darove podaril; od sebe »ki smo prah«, rastemo do mene, ki mi je vse podarjeno.
Vzpostavljen je torej odnos Jaz-Ti (M. Buber), ki je »dokaz transcendence in njeno pri evanje
v loveku.«
Se znamo zahvaljevati?
7. Kralj prihaja... Izrael pri akuje kralja Pravi nosti. Psalm 20 in 21. Mesijanski Psalmi 2,
72, 110.
8. Romarski Psalmi, tako 15 in 24. 84. Naj na tem mestu ni ne re em o sodobnih
»romanjih«. Poglejte si enkrat globino, ki jo kaže sloviti spis Romarice Eterije (prvih
krš anskih asov). Pre iš evalna mo takega romanja nam danes ni ni manj potrebna, kot
tedaj. Je Jezusova družina romala v Jeruzalem? Nam to kaj pove? Se niso spraševali o Njem:
»Ali on ne pride na praznik« v Jeruzalem?
9. Modrostni Psalmi. Navadno so to abecedne pesmi (vendar abeceda ni naša, ampak
hebrejska), tako Psalm 34. Ti so zelo podobni modrim izrekom (Knjiga pregovorov,
Pridigar, Job).
15
Poleg literarnih vrst in razli nih izraznosti moramo sedaj dodati še nekaj splošnih zna ilnosti
Psalmov – in to:
7. Psalmi - osrednji izraz vere
Psalterij nikakor ne smemo gledati tako, kot bi bil nekšen drugoten izraz razodevanja ali celo
kot nekaj, kar je od zunaj dodano judovski veri. Nasprotno, Psalmi so bili osrednji verski
izraz Judovske vere – to je konkretnega judovskega loveka. Kristjanu je dovolj pomisliti
samo na Marijin Magnifikat, na Elizabetin vzklik, Zaharijev hvalospev, ali pa na Jezusove
»V Psalmih in prerokih je o meni pisano« in njegove besede na križu... (22 Ps).
V Psalmih je torej vera celovita in izražena v pesmi.
8. Ali so Psalmi prevedljivi?
Kar odlo no naj povem, da ne povsem – niso torej povsem prevedljivi. Prevedemo pa
vsebino, lupino, bolj ali manj besediš e. Ni pa mogo e v pravem smislu prevesti simboli nega
in pesniškega sveta teh pesmi tako, da bi imela isto isto mo , kot v originalih. Ne
prevajamo namre le besede v besedo, ampak moramo semitsko strukturo poskušati prevesti
v naše strukture – ki so pa (enostavno re eno) druga ne. To, kar je od simbolne ravni bi
moralo ostati na tej ravni; to kar je notranja rima, bi moralo ostati (pa ni mogo e). Z
notranjo rimo je povezan tudi organi ni ritem45. Tega pa enostavno ni mogo e ponoviti.
Simboli znotraj besedila delujejo na razli nih ravneh, kar bom poskusil pojasniti kasneje... Tu
je najtežje zaobse i vse ravni in razli ne pomenske možnosti. Simbol namre vle e vrsto
pomenov iz razli nih pomenskih plasti dopovedovanja in besedovanja. To seveda nujno vodi
do številnih vprašanj o interpretaciji besedil PISMA (razli nosti hermenevtik). Morje
problemov s tem v zvezi je vsaj malo predstavljivo, e si kdaj sami ogledamo odli no
predstavitveno študijo o tem46 Ermeneutica e verita; storia problemi della filozofia
dell'interpretazione.
Glej še drugo študijo: Northrop Frye, The Great Code: The Bible and Literature, Toronto
1982.
Vsak prevod je v asih kar svojsko razumevanje osnovnega besedila in velikokrat pomeni
silno vezanost na neko dolo eno tradicijo in slog prevajanja, ki jo seveda poznamo tudi pri
nas, na Slovenskem. isto nazadnje je vsak prevod tudi rezultat prevajalske politike in
uredniških dogovorov. Vendar moram re i, da me te » dogovorne koncencije« niti ne
zanimajo. Osebno mi je mnogo bolj zanimiv problem »napa nega razumevanja in metafor«,
kot se kaže v zgodovinskem procesu razumevanja nekega besedila. Tu seveda imamo opravka
s kategorijami, ki so ne le spodrsljaji jezika, ampak so v danih okoliš inah »branja« in
»pisanja« postale nenavadne in usodne. Tu se sre amo s »krivoverstvi« - kot z obsojenim
razumevanjem in prevajanjem in metaforiziranjem lastnega razumevanja.47 Tu se sre amo, na
45
Ritem v hebrejski poeziji je isto svojski. Spet moramo nazaj, v naše korenine v grški literaturi in poeziji in
ugotoviti, da je KRATKOMALO DRUGA NA. Tu torej naletimo na najtežje in povsem neprevedljivo
vprašanje hebrejskega pesništva. Hebrejski ritem ni kvantitativen ampak kvalitativen. Grško pesništvo ima
povsem ustaljena razmerja poudarjene in nepoudarjene dobe; sam naglas besed je v hebrejskem jeziku naraven,
to je na zadnjem in predzadnjem zlogu. e torej pogledamo grške pesniške oblike (stopic, 28), zlahka opazimo,
da bi se tem poudarkom prilegala za silo le dv obliki stare anti ne razdelitve ali metrike – jamb in še bolj
zna ilni anapest.
Poleg tega je v najnovejših preiskavah hebrejske poezije v ospredje potisnjeno vprašanje posameznih
pesniških figur (metafora, zlasti P. Ricoeur) in simbolov. seveda psalm kot celota zaživi šele ob
upoštevanju vseh posebnosti (poedinosti) v celoti. Šele takrat vidimo organsko celoto.
46
MURA Gaspare, Ermeneutica e verita; storia problemi della filozofia dell'interpretazione, Roma 1990 (Citta
nuova ED.). Autor je bil, med ostalimi, moj profesor na Lateranu.
47
Ta kategorija je »najmanj raz-um-ljiva«, saj so vedno krivoverski le »izrazi«, »stavki«. e pogledamo v
zgodovino krivoverstev pod tem vidikom se zgrozimo, kajti ti »stavki« so v asih privedli do grmad, obešenj,
obglavljenj in podobno. Tu zadevamo na izjemno težak problem »ubesedovanja« neke vere, nekega stališ a,
16
višji ravni, z »nekompatibilnostjo teologij«. Seveda nekompatibilnost ni ostajala samo na
papirju, ampak je v zgodovini Cerkve segla tudi do vešal in grmad. Bilo je... - sledi kratek
ekskurz.
8. a. Interpretacija je lahko tudi nevarna (excursus)***48
Ta ekskurz bralec na internetu lahko mirne duše izpusti. Predavanje o simbolih in psalmih naj
nadaljuje kar brez njega.
Seveda je prav interpretacija besedila in »naukov« Božje besede vodila do najhujših napak razlagalcev (tudi
Cerkve) in te do najhujših zmot in krivic, ki jih je Cerkev v svojem dolgem obstoju in razvoju storila.
Pomislimo le na najbolj tragi ne dogodke, obsodbe in grmade, ki jih dobro poznamo iz splošne in cerkvene
zgodovine. Tu so zgodbe, kakor so: G. Galilei49, N. Kopernik, Girolamo Savonarola50, Jan Hus51, Giordano
nekega »prevoda«, vendar v zadnjih konsekvencah pravzaprav to, kar se nanaša na simbole, ki jih neka
konkretna kultura in skupnost sprejema in »zna brati« - v tistem hipu.
e si tako postavimo problem »branja«, se nam branje Biblije v lu i judaisti ne tradicije (ki je mnogo bolj
zapletena kot tradicija katolištva naspram pravoslavju ali protestantizmu) pokaže kot »ena izmed možnih
na inov branja«, kot to sedaj vidi rimska Cerkev (v najnovejšem dokumentu Judovsko ljudstvo in njegovi sveti
spisi...). V zgodovini pa seveda ni bilo tako. To branje je bilo - spri o pogromov Judov - o itno zelo druga no.
Vendar, v takem na inu branja (danes) zginjajo tudi razlike med razli nimi interpretacijami temeljnih
protestantskih (evangeljskih) postavk. Pri tem pa seveda ne smemo pozabiti na zgodovinske razlike (na primer
dispute med Lutrom in Calvinom o evharistiji) v tedanjem asu, saj so ti spisi ohranjeni – pa jih danes, kot
pravim, beremo ( raz-um-emo) isto druga e, kot sta jih sama izrekala. (O tem problemu danes veliko pišejo
protestantski teologi že od Wittgensteina dalje). Vendar, problem je globok, kajti tudi v današnjem katolištvu
(o itno) še danes beremo to in ono teologijo (ali celo knjigo!) tudi v tisti lu i, da lahko izlo imo nekatere stavke
– in o o njih zatrdimo, da jih ne moremo katoliško »raz-um-eti« in potem izvajamo konsekvence, ki so danes
možne.
Zakaj to pravim?
Zato, da si problema simbolov in metafor v branju ne bi kdo predstavljal kot nekdo dlakocepstvo, ki v realnem
življenju nima nobene posebne veljave. Ima, in še kako ima!
48
Tukaj podajam le nekaj zgodovinskih vzporednic tega, kar pomeni razumevanje dolo enega besedila in rabo
besediš a v zgodovinskem kontekstu. No em torej ustvarjati neke posebne interpretacije zgodovine kot take.
Dotikam se le interpretativnega problema, ki v zgodovini ni bil brez – STRANPOTI in NAPAK tudi v Cerkvi.
49
Opravi il se mu je šele Janez Pavel II. O njegovi kotroverzi s Cerkvijo v WE beremo:
Church controversy
Galileo was a practicing Catholic, yet his writings on Copernican heliocentrism disturbed some in the Catholic Church who
believed in a geocentric model of the solar system. They argued that heliocentrism was in direct contradiction of the Bible
(Joshua 10:12): "Then spake Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord delivered up the Amorites before the children of
Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, 'Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon'." Such
Bible passages could be literally interpreted as asserting that the Sun and the Moon were both objects peripheral to the Earth;
they could be given a more symbolic, metaphysical interpretation (e.g., their representing a highly illuminated state of
consciousness (the Sun founded upon Gibeon) and a phase of lower reflected intellect (the Moon in the valley of Ajalon) or
thought); or they could be taken as simply a description of the appearance of the heavens as seen from Earth. At that time the
most literal Biblical interpretation was prevalent with the church hierarchy, especially among the Dominican Order,
facilitators of the Inquisition; it was also in line with the highly revered ancient writings of Aristotle and Plato.
The geocentric model was generally accepted at the time, as it had been since philosophers first considered the heavens. By
the time of the controversy, the Ptolemaic model had a serious rival in the Tychonian model in which the Earth was at the
center of the Universe, the Sun revolved around the Earth and the other planets revolved around the Sun. This model is
geometrically equivalent to the Copernican model and agreed with observations in that it predicted no parallax of the stars, an
effect that was impossible to detect with the instruments of the time. In the view of Tycho and many others, this model
explained the observable data of the time better than the geocentric model did. (That inference is valid, however, only on the
assumption that no very small effect had been missed: that the instruments of the time were absolutely perfect, or that the
Universe could not be much larger than was generally believed at the time. As to the latter, belief in the large, possibly
infinite, size of the Universe was part of the heretical beliefs for which Giordano Bruno had been burned at the stake in
1600.)
An understanding of the controversies, if it is even possible, requires attention not only to the politics of religious
organizations but to those of academic philosophy. Before Galileo had trouble with the Jesuits and before the Dominican friar
Caccini denounced him from the pulpit, his employer heard him accused of contradicting Scripture by a professor of
philosophy, Cosimo Boscaglia, who was neither a theologian nor a priest. Galileo was defended on the spot by a Benedictine
abbot, Benedetto Castelli, who was also a professor of mathematics and a former student of Galileo's. It was this exchange,
17
reported to Galileo by Castelli, that led Galileo to write the Letter to Grand Duchess Christina. (Castelli remained Galileo's
friend, visiting him at Arcetri near the end of Galileo's life, after months of effort to get permission from the Inquisition to do
so.)
There is evidence of an organized and secretive opposition to Galileo among some academic philosophers. This included
professors against whom Galileo, who was not officially a philosopher at all, had successfully argued for the theory of
buoyancy developed by Archimedes, as against that of Aristotle, which had been taught in the academies. Moreover, the new
telescopic discoveries in astronomy were, even without arguments on heliocentrism, upsetting the established comprehensive
theory of the heavens, again due to Aristotle. The Jesuit astronomers, after a period of disbelief when good telescopes were
almost unobtainable, had soon enough agreed on the validity of Galileo's discoveries; by contrast, some professors of the
secular academic world refused for a time to look through the telescope. Caccini's attack, if not actually inspired by the
philosophers, was welcomed by them and had their support.
However, real power lay with the Church, and Galileo's arguments were most fiercely fought on the religious level. The late
nineteenth and early twentieth century historian Andrew Dickson White wrote from an anti-clerical perspective:
The war became more and more bitter. The Dominican Father Caccini preached a sermon from the text, "Ye men of Galilee,
why stand ye gazing up into heaven?" and this wretched pun upon the great astronomer's name ushered in sharper weapons;
for, before Caccini ended, he insisted that "geometry is of the devil," and that "mathematicians should be banished as the
authors of all heresies." The Church authorities gave Caccini promotion.
Father Lorini proved that Galileo's doctrine was not only heretical but "atheistic," and besought the Inquisition to intervene.
The Bishop of Fiesole screamed in rage against the Copernican system, publicly insulted Galileo, and denounced him to the
Grand-Duke. The Archbishop of Pisa secretly sought to entrap Galileo and deliver him to the Inquisition at Rome. The
Archbishop of Florence solemnly condemned the new doctrines as unscriptural; and Paul V, while petting Galileo, and
inviting him as the greatest astronomer of the world to visit Rome, was secretly moving the Archbishop of Pisa to pick up
evidence against the astronomer.
Cardinal Robert Bellarmine, one of the most respected Catholic theologians of the time, was called on to adjudicate the
dispute between Galileo and his opponents, including both religious zealots and secular university professors. The
appointment shows the world view that prevailed before the Scientific Revolution: a leading theologian was assigned to tell
scholars what views they were allowed to "hold or defend" concerning the workings of the physical world.
Bellarmine insisted that Galileo furnish more adequate proof of his new theories before he would be allowed to teach them as
true or even as probably true. Until such proof was forthcoming, the ideas should only be taught as hypothesis, in the old
sense of the word: that is, as calculating tricks that were not to be considered as in any way real.
This put Galileo in a difficult position, as he had no conclusive proof for his position. In fact, his theories had gaps and errors,
as is (we now know) the usual condition of radically new scientific work. The real meaning of the requirement for better
proof became clear in the 1630s, when Galileo was condemned by the Inquisition because of his book Dialogue Concerning
the Two Chief World Systems. That book contained what Galileo considered to be a physical proof of the Earth's motion,
based on the tides; had it been correct (which it was not), it would have satisfied Bellarmine's requirement. In the event, the
Inquisition did not even consider whether the argument was right or wrong. It condemned Galileo simply for publishing,
ignoring Bellarmine's reasoning.
While many in the Church supported Galileo, the charges brought by the priests who had been goaded to act against him
were serious. These men asserted that dreadful consequences must result to Christian theology were the heavenly bodies
proved to revolve about the Sun and not about the Earth. Their most tremendous dogmatic engine was the statement that "his
pretended discovery vitiates the whole Christian plan of salvation." Father Lecazre declared, "It casts suspicion on the
doctrine of the incarnation." Others declared, "It upsets the whole basis of theology. If the Earth is a planet, and only one
among several planets, it can not be that any such great things have been done specially for it as the Christian doctrine
teaches. If there are other planets, since God makes nothing in vain, they must be inhabited; but how can their inhabitants be
descended from Adam? How can they trace back their origin to Noah's ark? How can they have been redeemed by the
Saviour?" Nor was this argument confined to the theologians of the Roman Church; Melanchthon, Protestant as he was, had
already used it in his attacks on Copernicus and his school. (White, 1898; online text)
In 1616, the Inquisition warned Galileo not to hold or defend the hypothesis asserted in Copernicus's On the Revolutions,
though it has been debated whether he was admonished not to "teach in any way" the heliocentric theory. Copernicus's book
was not condemned, rather, it was just held pending the correction of a few sentences. When Galileo was tried in 1633, the
Inquisition was proceeding on the premise that he had been ordered not to teach it at all, based on a paper in the records from
1616; but Galileo produced a letter from Cardinal Bellarmine that showed only the "hold or defend" order. The latter is in
Bellarmine's own hand and of unquestioned authenticity; the former is an unsigned copy, violating the Inquisition's own rule
that the record of such an admonition had to be signed by all parties and notarized. Leaving aside technical rules of evidence,
what can one conclude as to the real events? There are two schools of thought. According to Stillman Drake, the order not to
teach was delivered unofficially and improperly; Bellarmine would not allow a formal record to be made, and assured Galileo
in writing that the only order in effect was not to "defend or hold". According to Giorgio di Santillana, however, the unsigned
minute was simply a fabrication by the Inquisition.
In 1623 Pope Gregory XV died, and Galileo's close friend Maffeo Barberini became Pope Urban VIII. The new Pope gave
Galileo vague permission to ignore the ban and write a book about his opinions, so long as he did not openly support his
theory. Galileo consented, and set to work writing his masterpiece, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems
(often called simply the Dialogue). It involved an argument between two intellectuals, one geocentric, the other heliocentric,
and a layman, neutral but interested. Although it presented the Church's point of view, the geocentrist was depicted foolishly,
while the heliocentrist often dominated the argument and convinced the neutral member in the end.
The Dialogue was published in 1632 with the approval of Catholic censors. It was applauded by intellectuals but nevertheless
aroused the Church's ire. Despite his continued insistence that his work in the area was purely theoretical, despite his strict
18
following of the church protocol for publication of works (which required prior examination by church censors and
subsequent permission), and despite his former friendship with the Pope (who presided throughout the ordeal), Galileo was
summoned to trial before the Roman Inquisition in 1633.
The Inquisition had rejected earlier pleas by Galileo to postpone or relocate the trial because of his ill health. At a meeting
presided by Pope Urban VIII, the Inquisition decided to notify Galileo that he either had to come to Rome or that he would be
arrested and brought there in chains. Galileo arrived in Rome for his trial before the Inquisition on February 13, 1633. After
two weeks in quarantine, Galileo was detained at the comfortable residence of the Tuscan ambassador, as a favor to the
influential Grand Duke Ferdinand II de' Medici. When the ambassador reported Galileo's arrival and asked how long the
proceedings would be, the Pope replied that the Holy Office proceeded slowly, and was still in the process of preparing for
the formal proceedings. In the event, having responded to the urgent demands of the Inquisition that he must report to Rome
immediately, Galileo was left to wait for two months before proceedings would begin.
On April 12, 1633, Galileo was brought to trial, and the formal interrogation by the Inquisition began. During this
interrogation Galileo stated that he did not defend the Copernican theory, and cited a letter of Cardinal Bellarmine from 1615
to support this contention. The Inquisition questioned him on whether he had been ordered in 1616 not to teach Copernican
ideas in any way (see above); he denied remembering any such order, and produced a letter from Bellarmine saying only that
he was not to hold or defend those doctrines.
He was then detained for eighteen days in a room in the offices of the Inquisition (not in a dungeon cell). During this time the
Commissary General of the Inquisition, Vincenzo (later Cardinal) Maculano, visited him for what amounted to plea
bargaining, persuading Galileo to confess to having gone too far in writing the book. In a second hearing on April 30, Galileo
confessed to having erred in the writing of the book, through vain ambition, ignorance, and inadvertence. He was then
allowed to return to the home of the Tuscan ambassador. On May 10, he submitted his written defense, in which he defended
himself against the charge of disobeying the Church's order, confessed to having erred through pride in writing the book, and
asked for mercy in light of his age and ill health.
A month later (June 21), by order of the Pope, he was given an examination of intention, a formal process that involved
showing the accused the instruments of torture. At this proceeding, he said, "I am here to obey, and have not held this
[Copernican] opinion after the determination made, as I said."
On June 22, 1633, the Inquisition held the final hearing on Galileo, who was then 69 years old and pleaded for mercy,
pointing to his "regrettable state of physical unwellness". Galileo was forced at this time to "abjure, curse and detest" his
work and to promise to denounce others who held his prior viewpoint. Galileo did everything the church requested him to do,
following (insofar as there is any evidence) the plea bargain of two months earlier; nonetheless, he was convicted of "grave
suspicion of heresy" and was sentenced to life imprisonment.
Although ten Cardinal Inquisitors had heard the case, the sentence delivered on June 22 bears the signature of only seven;
one of the three missing was Cardinal Barberini, the Pope's nephew. It is generally held that this indicates a refusal to endorse
the sentence. The seven who signed, however, were those who were present at that day's proceedings; Cardinals Barberini
and Borgia in particular, were attending an audience with the Pope on that day. Analysis of the Inquisition's records has
shown that the presence of only seven of ten Cardinals was not exceptional; hence the inference that Barberini was protesting
the decision may be doubted.
That the threat of torture and death Galileo was facing was a real one is widely, though not universally, accepted. Many point
to the earlier Inquisitional trial against Giordano Bruno, who was burned at the stake in 1600 ostensibly for holding a
naturalistic view of the Universe. However, Bruno denied the doctrine of the Trinity, the Incarnation and the immortality of
the soul, among other heresies. He partially recanted his heretical beliefs during the investigation of his works, but returned to
them before the investigation was completed. Heretics were never burned unless they recanted and subsequently returned to
their heresies. Galileo was never convicted of heresy; even in the second trial, he was only "vehemently suspected of heresy".
It is often held that he was punished at the second trial for having disobeyed what was believed to be a valid injunction not to
discuss Copernicanism. The formal decision of the court, however, makes no mention of such an order, condemning him only
for the Copernican teachings. Moreover, in order to believe that there was such an injunction, one would have had to deny the
word of a Cardinal (now a Saint) of the Church. In any case, such disobedience was not punishable by death. Thus, there is
no substantial correspondence between Galileo's case and Bruno's. Whether such fine legal distinctions entered into Galileo's
assessment of the dangers that faced him while the Inquisition was threatening him with torture and death is, of course,
beyond the scope of this article.
The tale that Galileo, rising from his knees after recanting, said "E pur si muove!" (But it does move!) cannot be accepted as
true: the penalty for going back on a confession before the Inquisition was to be burned at the stake (famously, in the case of
Giordano Bruno and Jacques de Molay), and such a defiance would have been a ticket to follow Bruno to the stake. But the
widespread belief that the whole incident is an 18th century invention is also false. (Drake, 1978, pp. 356–357). A Spanish
painting, dated 1643 or possibly 1645, shows Galileo writing the phrase on the wall of a dungeon cell. Here we have a second
version of the story, which also cannot be true, because Galileo was never imprisoned in a dungeon; but the painting shows
that some story of "E pur si muove" was circulating in Galileo's time. In the months immediately after his condemnation,
Galileo resided with Archbishop Ascanio Piccolomini of Siena, a learned man and a sympathetic host; the fact that
Piccolomini's brother was a military attaché in Madrid, where the painting was made some years later, suggests that Galileo
may have made the remark to the Archbishop, who then wrote to his family concerning the event, which later became garbled
in re-telling.
Galileo was sentenced to prison, but because of his advanced age (and/or Church politics) the sentence was commuted to
house arrest at his villas in Arcetri and Florence 1. Because of a painful hernia, he requested permission to consult physicians
in Florence, which was denied by Rome, which warned that further such requests would lead to imprisonment. Under arrest,
he was forced to recite penitentiary psalms regularly, but his daughter, who was a nun at a nearby convent, successfully
petitioned Rome to be allowed to say the psalms in his place. He was not supposed to have house guests, but this rule was not
19
always strictly enforced. He was allowed to continue his less controversial research. During his confinement at home, Galilei
managed to write an important book on his discoveries in physics (not related to the astronomical controversies), the
"Discorsi e Dimostrazioni Matematiche, intorno á due nuoue scienze" or Two New Sciences.
Publication was another matter. His Dialogue had been put on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum, the official black list of
banned books, where it stayed until 1822 (Hellman, 1998). The banning of specific works was not an uncommon occurrence
or one necessarily involving other dire consequences; Bellarmine himself had at one time been threatened with having his
own work placed on the index. Nor, of course, did the ban inhibit Protestants and others; it meant only that Roman Catholics
would not be able (without special permission) to know what Galileo had written. However, the prohibition did not stop at
the one book. Though the sentence announced against Galileo mentioned no other works, Galileo found out two years later
that publication of anything he might ever write had been quietly banned. The ban was effective in France, Poland, and
German states, but not in the Netherlands. When the time came to publish the new book, Galileo had it smuggled out to
Leiden, where it was published in 1638.
Placed under house-arrest, Galileo would, in 1638, be allowed to move to his home near Florence. Though by then totally
blind, he continued to teach and write. After more than 8 years under arrest, he died at his villa in Arcetri, just north of
Florence, in 1642.
According to Andrew Dickson White, in A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (III.iii), 1896,
Galileo's experiences demonstrate a classic case of a scholar forced to recant a scientific insight because it offended powerful,
conservative forces in society: for the church at the time, it was not the scientific method that should be used to find truth—
especially in certain areas— but the doctrine as interpreted and defined by church scholars, and White documented how this
doctrine was defended by the Church with torture, execution, deprivation of freedom, and censorship. In a less polemical
frame, this has remained the mainstream view among the historians of science. However, this elides much of the underlying
complexity of the trials and their context within Church and secular academic politics, as well as the weaknesses of some of
Galileo's specific arguments, in light of the imprecise observations available at the time.
The viewpoints of White and similar-minded colleagues were never accepted by the Catholic community, partially because
White's final analysis depicted Christianity as a destructive force. A fierce expression of this critical attitude can also be seen
in Bertolt Brecht's play about Galileo, a source for popular ideas about the scientist. This is, of course, unfortunate. Brecht, a
Marxist, was not interested in hewing to the historical facts so much as he was in making a case against theism and for
atheism. Moreover, deeper examination of the primary sources for Galileo and his trial shows that claims of deprivation were
likely exaggerated. Dava Sobel's biography Galileo's Daughter offers a different set of insights into Galileo and his world, in
large part through the private correspondence of Maria Celeste, the daughter of the title, and her father.
In 1992, 359 years after the Galileo trial and 350 years after his death, Pope John Paul II established a commission that
ultimately issued an apology, lifting the edict of Inquisition against Galileo: "Galileo sensed in his scientific research the
presence of the Creator who, stirring in the depths of his spirit, stimulated him, anticipating and assisting his intuitions." After
the release of this report, the Pope said further that "... Galileo, a sincere believer, showed himself to be more perceptive in
this regard [the relation of scientific and Biblical truths] than the theologians who opposed him."
50
O njem beremo, na kratko: Girolamo Savonarola (Ferrara, September 21, 1452 – Florence, May 23, 1498), also
translated as Jerome Savonarola or Hieronymous Savonarola, was a Dominican priest and, briefly, ruler of
Florence, who was known for religious reformation and anti-Renaissance preaching and his book burning and
destruction of art.
Oddly, Lorenzo de Medici, the previous ruler of Florence and patron of many Renaissance artists, was both a
former patron of Savonarola and eventually, the target of Savonarola's preaching.
After the overthrow of the Medici in 1494, Savonarola was the sole leader of Florence, setting up a democratic
republic. Characterizing it as a "Christian and religious Republic", one of its first acts was to make sodomy,
previously punishable by fine, into a capital offence. His chief enemies were the Duke of Milan and Pope
Alexander VI, who issued numerous restraints against him, all of which were ignored.
In 1497 he and his followers carried out the famous Bonfire of the Vanities. They sent boys from door to door
collecting items associated with moral laxity: mirrors, cosmetics, lewd pictures, pagan books, gaming tables, fine
dresses, and the works of immoral poets, and burnt them all in a large pile in the Piazza della Signoria of
Florence. Fine Florentine Renaissance artwork was lost in Savonarola's notorious bonfires, including paintings
by Sandro Botticelli thrown on the pyres by the artist himself.
Florence soon tired of Savonarola's hectoring. During his Ascension Day sermon on May 4, 1497, bands of
youths rioted, and the riot became a revolt: taverns reopened, and men gambled publicly.
On May 13, 1497 he was excommunicated by Pope Alexander VI, and in 1498, he was simultaneously hanged and
burned, in the same place and manner that he had condemned others. He was charged with uttering prophecies,
sedition, and religious error. Jacopo Nardi, who recorded the incident in his Istorie della città di Firenze, said that
his executioner lit the flame crying, "The one who wanted to burn me is now himself put to the flames." Niccolò
Machiavelli, author of The Prince, also witnessed and wrote about the execution. The Medici regained control
over Florence.
(A plaque commemorates the site of Savonarola's execution in the Piazza della Signoria, Florence.)
In the twentieth century, a movement for the canonization of Savonarola began to develop within the Catholic
Church, with many judging his excommunication and execution to have been unjust.
20
Further reading:
Life and Times of Girolamo Savonarola by Pasquale Villari
The novel Romola by George Eliot features Savonarola as a central character.
The Meddlesome Friar by Michael de la Bedoyere. 1957.
Savonarola by Piero Misciattelli (trans. by M. Peters-Roberts). 1930.
Savonarola: A Biography in Dramatic Episodes by William Van Wyck. 1927. (A play.)
51
O Janu Husu berem v Katoliški Enciklopediji:
Born at Husinetz in Southern Bohemia, 1369; died at Constance 6 July, 1415.
At an early age he went to Prague where he supported himself by singing and serving in the churches. His
conduct was exemplary and his devotion to study remarkable. In 1393 he received the degree of Bachelor of Arts
from the University of Prague and in 1396 the master's degree. He was ordained a priest in 1400 and became
rector of the university 1402-03. About the same time he was appointed preacher in the newly erected Bethlehem
chapel. Hus was a strong partisan on the side of the Czechs, and hence of the Realists, and he was greatly
influenced by the writings of Wyclif. Though forty five propositions of the latter were proscribed in 1403 by
ecclesiastical authority, Hus translated Wyclif's "Trialogus" into Czech and helped to circulate it. From the pulpit
he inveighed against the morals of clergy, episcopate, and papacy, thus taking an active part in the movement for
reform. Archbishop Zbynek (Sbinco), however was not only lenient with Hus, but favoured him with an
appointment as preacher to the biennial synod. On the other hand Innocent VII directed the archbishop (24 June,
1405) to take measures against the heretical teachings of Wyclif, especially the doctrine of impanation in the
Eucharist. The archbishop complied by issuing a synodal decree against these errors -- at the same time he
forbade any further attacks on the clergy. In the following year (1406) a document bearing the seal of the
University of Oxford and eulogizing Wyclif was brought by two Bohemian students to Prague; Hus read it in
triumph from the pulpit. In 1408 Sbinco received a letter from Gregory XII stating that the Holy See had been
informed of the spread of the Wycliffite heresy and especially of King Wenceslaus's sympathy with the sectaries.
This stirred up the king to measures of prosecution and aroused the university to clear itself of the suspicion of
heresy. At the June synod it was ordered that all writings of Wyclif should be handed over to the archdiocesan
chancery for correction. Hus obeyed the order, declaring that he condemned whatever errors these writings
contained.
About the same time a new conflict broke out on national lines. The king agreed to the "neutrality" plan
proposed by the secessionist cardinals at the Council of Pisa and endeavoured to have it recognized by the
university. The Czechs fell in with his wishes but the three other "nations" refused. The king then decreed (18
January, 1409) that in the university congregations the Czechs should have three votes, and the other "nations"
should have only one vote between them. In consequence the German masters and students in great numbers
(5,000 to 20,000) left Prague and went to Leipzig, Erfurt, and other universities in the North. The king now
forbade communication with Gregory XII and proceeded against those of the clergy who disregarded his
prohibition. In consequence the archbishop placed Prague and the vicinity under interdict, a measure which cost
many of the loyal clergy their position and property. Hus, who had become once more rector of the university,
was called to account by the archbishop for his Wycliffite tendencies and was reported to Rome with the result
that Alexander V, in a Bull of 20 December 1409, directed the archbishop to forbid any preaching except in
cathedral, collegiate, parish, and cloister churches, and to see that Wyclif's writings were withdrawn from
circulation. In accordance with the Bull the archbishop at the June synod of 1410, ordered Wyclif's writings to be
burned and restricted preaching to the churches named above. Against these measures Hus declaimed from the
pulpit and, with his sympathizers in the university, sent a protest to John XXIII. The archbishop, 16 July, 1410,
excommunicated Hus and his adherents. Secure of the royal protection, Hus continued the agitation in favour of
Wyclif, but at the end of August he was summoned to appear in person before the pope. He begged the pope to
dispense with the personal visit and sent in his stead representatives to plead his case. In February 1411, sentence
of excommunication was pronounced against him and published on 15 March in all the churches of Prague. This
led to further difficulties between the king and the archbishop, in consequence of which the latter left Prague to
take refuge with the Hungarian King Sigismund. But he died on the journey, 23 September.
Hus meanwhile openly defended Wyclif, and this position he maintained especially against John Stokes, a
licentiate of Cambridge, who had come to Prague and declared that in England Wyclif was regarded as a heretic.
With no less vehemence Hus attacked the Bulls (9 September and 2 December 1411) in which John XXIII
proclaimed indulgences to all who would supply funds for the crusade against Ladislaus of Naples. Both Hus
and Jerome of Prague aroused the university and the populace against the papal commission which had been sent
to announce the indulgences, and its members in consequence were treated with every sort of indignity. The
report of these doings led the Roman authorities to take more vigorous action. Not only was the former
excommunication against Hus reiterated, but his residence was placed under interdict. Finally the pope ordered
Hus to be imprisoned and the Bethlehem chapel destroyed. The order was not obeyed, but Hus towards the end
21
of 1412 left Prague and took refuge at Austi in the south. Here he wrote his principal work, "De ecclesiâ". As the
king took no steps to carry out the papal edict, Hus was back again at Prague by the end of April, 1414, and
posted on the walls of the Bethlehem Chapel his treatise "De sex erroribus". Out of this and the "De ecclesiâ"
Gerson extracted a number of propositions which he submitted to Archbishop Konrad von Vechta (formerly
Bishop of Olmütz) with a warning against their heretical character. In November following the Council of
Constance assembled, and Hus, urged by King Sigismund, decided to appear before that body and give an
account of his doctrine. At Constance he was tried, condemned, and burnt at the stake, 6 July, 1415. The same
fate befell Jerome of Prague 30 May, 1416.
Condemnation and Execution of John Hus
Since 1408 John Hus, an eloquent preacher of Prague, had openly taught the Wycliffite heresies. By his ardent zeal for ecclesiastical reforms
on the basis of Wyclif's teachings, his patriotic insistence on the purity of Bohemian faith and his assertion of Bohemian nationalism, he had
gone rapidly to the front as a leader of his nation, then deeply embittered against the Germans dominant in the political and academic life of
Bohemia. Since 1412 he had been banished from Prague, but was only the more dangerous, by his fiery discourse and his writings, among
the highly excited Bohemians, who mostly saw in him the flower of their national genius, and were otherwise embittered against a clergy
which then offered too many elements of weakness to the attacks of such reformers as John Hus and his friend and admirer Jerome
(Hieronymus) of Prague. The errors of Hus concerned chiefly the nature of the Church (only the predestined), the papal headship, the rule of
faith (Scripture and the law of Christ), Communion under both kinds (q. v. also HUSSITES), auricular confession (unnecessary), civil
authority (dependent among Christians on state of grace). More than once (e. g. 1411) Hus had appealed to a general council, and when at the
opening of the Council of Constance Emperor Sigismund and King Wenceslaus of Bohemia urged him to present himself, he was not
unwilling; it was made up, he knew, of ardent reformers, and he could hope by his eloquence to convert them to his own intense faith in the
ideas of Wyclif. He left Prague, 11 October, 1414, in the company of three Bohemian nobles and assured of a safe-conduct (salvus
conductus) from Emperor Sigismund. They entered Constance 3 November, where Hus took up his residence in a private house, and where
(5 November) the safe-conduct was delivered to him. The day after his arrival he appeared before John XXIII, who treated him courteously,
removed the censures of excommunication and interdict, but forbade him to say Mass or to preach, also to appear at public ecclesiastical
functions (his thoroughly heretical and even revolutionary doctrines were long notorious and, as said above, had already been condemned at
Rome). He appeared again before the pope and the cardinals, 28 November, declared himself innocent of a single error, and said he was
ready to retract and do penance if convicted of any. He had continued, however, to violate the papal prohibition, said Mass daily and
preached to the people present. Consequently he was the same day arrested, by order of the Bishop of Constance, and a little later (6
December) placed in the Dominican convent. On complaining of the unsanitary condition of his place of confinement he was transferred to
the castle of Gottlieben, and later to the Franciscan convent at Constance (June, 1415). His examination went on during April and May, and
was conducted by d'Ailly and Fillastre; in the meantime he carried on an extensive correspondence, wrote various treatises, and replied to the
charges of his opponents. His Bohemian friends protested against the arrest of Hus, and exhibited the emperor's safe-conduct (but only after
the arrest). Sigismund was at first wroth over the arrest, but later (1 Jan., 1415) declared that he would not prevent the council from dealing
according to law with persons accused of heresy. The aforesaid condemnation (4 May) of the forty-five propositions of Wyclif foreshadowed the fate of Hus, despite the protests of Bohemians and Poles against his severe incarceration, the slanders against Bohemian faith,
the delay of justice, secrecy of the proceedings, and the violation of the imperial safe-conduct (Raynaldus, ad an. 1414, no. 10). The public
trial took place on 5, 7, and 8 June, 1415; extracts from his works were read, witnesses were heard. He denied some of the teachings
attributed to him, defended others, notably opinions of Wyclif, declared that no Bohemian was a heretic, etc. He refused all formulæ of
submission, again declared himself conscious of no error, nor, as he said, had any been proved against him from the Scriptures. He declared
that he would not condemn the truth, nor perjure himself. His books were burned by order of the council (24 June). New efforts to obtain a
retractation proved fruitless. He was brought for final sentence before the fifteenth session (6 July, 1415), at which the emperor assisted, and
on which occasion thirty propositions, taken mostly from the work of Hus "On the Church" (De Ecclesiâ), were read publicly. He refused to
retract anything and so was condemned as a heretic, deposed, and degraded, and handed over to the secular arm, which in turn condemned
him to perish at the stake, at that time the usual legal punishment of convicted heretics. He suffered that cruel death with self-possession and
courage and when about to expire cried out, it is said: "Christ, Son of the living God, have mercy on us!" His ashes were thrown into the
Rhine. Owing largely to the dramatic circumstances of his death, he became at once the hero of Bohemian patriotism and the martyr-saint of
multitudes in Bohemia and elsewhere who shared his demagogic and revolutionary principles. They were surely incompatible with either the
ecclesiastical or the civil order of the time, and would at any period have bred both religious and civil anarchy, had they been put into
practice. As to the safe-conduct of the emperor, we must distinguish, says Dr. von Funk (Kirchengeschichte, 3d ed., Freiburg, 1902, p. 495,
and the more recent literature there quoted; also "Der Katholik", 1898, LXXVIII, 186-90, and K. Müller, non-Catholic, in the "Hist.
Vierteljahrschrift", 1898, 41-86) between the arrest of Hus at Constance and his execution. The former act was always accounted in Bohemia
a violation of the safe-conduct and a breach of faith on the emperor's part; on the other hand they knew well, and so did Hus, that the safeconduct was only a guarantee against illegal violence and could not protect him from the sentence of his legitimate judges. (On the death
penalty for heresy, see Ficker, "Die gesetzliche Einführung der Todestrafe für Häresie" in "Mittheil. d. Inst. f. oest. Geschichtsforschung",
1888, 177 sqq., and Havet, "L'hérésie et le bras séculier au moyen âge jusqu'au XIIIe siècle", Paris, 1881; see also Gosselin, "Temporal
Power of the Pope in the Middle Ages", I, 85-89). In the medieval German codes known as the Sachsenspiegel (about 1225) and the
Schwabenspiegel (about 1275), heresy is already punishable with the stake. It is not true that the council declared that no faith should be kept
with a heretic (see Pallavicino, "Hist. Conc. Trid.", XII, 15, 8; Höfler in "Hist. polit. Blätter", IV, 421, and Hefele, "Conciliengesch.", VII,
227, also Baudrillart, op. cit., II, 1217). In the following year Jerome (Hieronymus) of Prague, the friend of Hus, suffered the same fate at
Constance. He had come voluntarily to the council in April, 1415, but soon fled the city; afterwards, mindful of the fate of Hus, he obtained
from the council a safe-conduct to return for his defence. He did not appear, however, and was soon seized in Bavaria and brought in chains
to Constance. In September, 1415, he abjured the forty-five propositions of Wyclif and the thirty of Hus, but did not regain his freedom, as
his sincerity was suspected, and new charges were made against him. Finally, he was brought before the council, 23 May, 1416, one year
after his arrest. This time he solemnly withdrew his abjuration as a sinful act and compelled by fear, and proclaimed Hus a holy and upright
man. He was forthwith condemned as a heretic in the twenty-first session (30 May, 1416) and perished at the stake with no less courage than
Hus. The humanist Poggio was an eyewitness of his death, and his letter to Leonardo of Arezzo, describing the scene, may be seen in Hefele,
"Conciliengesch.", VII, 280 sqq. The death of both Hus and Jerome of Prague affected strongly other humanists of the time; Æneas Sylvius
(later Pius II) said that they went to their deaths as men invited to a banquet. The immediate consequences were grave enough, i. e. the long
Utraquist wars. For an equitable criticism of the defects in the trials of both Hus and Jerome see Baudrillart in "Dict. de théol. cath.", II,
1216-17. On December 18, 1999, Pope John Paul II apologized for the execution of Jan Hus.
22
Bruno52... in še številne druge (John Wycliff, Hieronim Praški, Siger Brabantski...). Kaj pomeni interpretacija v
zgodovinskem kontekstu vidimo šele tedaj, ko spoznamo zgodbe teh ljudi v svojem asu.
52
O njem beremo v Enc.Cath.
Giordano Bruno Italian philosopher, b. at Nola in Campania, in the Kingdom of Naples, in 1548; d. at Rome, 1600. At the
age of eleven he went to Naples, to study "humanity, logic, and dialectic", and, four years later, he entered the Order of St.
Dominic, giving up his worldly name of Filippo and taking that of Giordano. He made his novitiate at Naples and continued
to study there. In 1572 he was ordained priest.
It seems, however, that, even as a novice, he attracted attention by the originality of his views and by his outspoken criticism
of accepted theological doctrines. After his ordination things reached such a pass that, in 1576, formal accusation of heresy
was brought against him. Thereupon he went to Rome, but, apparently, did not mend his manner of speaking of the mysteries
of faith; for the accusations were renewed against him at the convent of the Minerva. Within a few months of his arrival he
fled the city and cast off all allegiance to his order.
From this point on, his life-story is the tale of his wanderings from one country to another and of his failure to find peace
anywhere. He tarried awhile in several Italian cities, and in 1579 went to Geneva, where he seems to have adopted the
Calvinist faith, although afterwards, before the ecclesiastical tribunal at Venice, he steadfastly denied that he had ever joined
the Reformed Church. This much at least is certain; he was excommunicated by the Calvinist Council on account of his
disrespectful attitude towards the heads of that Church and was obliged to leave the city. Thence he went to Toulouse, Lyons,
and (in 1581) to Paris.
At Lyons he completed his "Clavis Magna", or "Great Key" to the art of remembering. In Paris he published several works
which further developed his art of memory-training and revealed the two-fold influence of Raymond Lully and the neoPlatonists. In 1582 he published a characteristic work, "Il candelaio", or "The Torchbearer", a satire in which he exhibits in a
marked degree the false taste then in vogue among the humanists, many of whom mistook obscenity for humour. While at
Paris he lectured publicly on philosophy, under the auspices, as it seems, of the College of Cambrai, the forerunner of the
College of France.
In 1583 he crossed over to England, and, for a time at least, enjoyed the favour of Queen Elizabeth and the friendship of Sir
Philip Sidney. To the latter he dedicated the most bitter of his attacks on the Catholic Church, "Il spaccio della bestia
trionfante", "The Expulsion of the Triumphant Beast", published in 1584. He visited Oxford, and, on being refused the
privilege of lecturing there, he published (1584) his "Cena delle ceneri", or "Ash-Wednesday Supper", in which he attacked
the Oxford professors, saying that they knew more about beer than about Greek. In 1585 he returned to France, and during
the year which he spent in Paris at this time made several attempts to become reconciled to the Catholic Church, all of which
failed because of his refusal to accept the condition imposed, namely, that he should return to his order.
In Germany, whither he went in 1587, he showed the same spirit of insolent self-assertion as at Oxford. In Helmstadt he was
excommunicated by the Lutherans. After some time spent in literary activity at Frankfort, he went, in 1591, to Venice at the
invitation of Mocenigo, who professed to be interested in his system of memory-training. Failing to obtain from Bruno the
secret of his "natural magic", Mocenigo denounced him to the Inquisition. Bruno was arrested, and in his trial before the
Venetian inquisitors first took refuge in the principle of "two-fold truth", saying that the errors imputed to him were held by
him "as a philosopher, and not as an honest Christian"; later, however, he solemnly abjured all his errors and doubts in the
matter of Catholic doctrine and practice (Berti, Docum., XII, 22 and XIII, 45). At this point the Roman Inquisition intervened
and requested his extradition. After some hesitation the Venetian authorities agreed, and in February, 1593, Bruno was sent to
Rome, and for six years was kept in the prison of the Inquisition. Historians have striven in vain to discover the explanation
of this long delay on the part of the Roman authorities. In the spring of 1599, the trial was begun before a commission of the
Roman Inquisition, and, after the accused had been granted several terms of respite in which to retract his errors, he was
finally condemned (January, 1600), handed over to the secular power (8 February), and burned at the stake in the Campo dei
Fiori in Rome (17 February). Bruno was not condemned for his defence of the Copernican system of astronomy, nor for his
doctrine of the plurality of inhabited worlds, but for his theological errors, among which were the following: that Christ was
not God but merely an unusually skilful magician, that the Holy Ghost is the soul of the world, that the Devil will be saved,
etc.
To the works of Bruno already mentioned the following are to be added: "Della causa, principio ed uno"; "Dell' infinito
universo e dei mondi"; "De Compendiosâ Architecturâ"; "De Triplici Minimo"; "De Monade, Numero et Figurâ." In these
"the Nolan" expounds a system of philosophy in which the principal elements are neo-Platonism, materialistic monism,
rational mysticism (after the manner of Raymond Lully), and the naturalistic concept of the unity of the material world
(inspired by the Copernican astronomy). His attitude towards Aristotle is best illustrated by his reiterated assertion that the
natural philosophy of the Stagirite is vitiated by the predominance of the dialectical over the mathematical mode of
conceiving natural phenomena. Towards the Scholastics in general his feeling was one of undisguised contempt; he excepted,
however, Albert tbe Great and St. Thomas, for whom he always maintained a high degree of respect. He wished to reform the
Aristotelean philosophy, and yet he was bitterly opposed to his contemporaries, Ramus and Patrizzi, whose efforts were
directed towards the same obect. He was acquainted, though only in a superficial way, with the writings of the pre-Socratic
philosophers of Greece, and with the works of the neo-Platonists, especially with the books falsely attributed to Iamblichus
and Plotinus. From the neo-Platonists he derived the tendency of his thought towards monism. From the pre-Socratic
philosophers he borrowed the materialistic interpretation of the One. From the Copernican doctrine, which was attracting so
much attention in the century in which he lived, he learned to identify the material One with the visible, infinite, heliocentric
universe.
Thus, his system of thought is an incoherent materialistic pantheism. God and the world are one; matter and spirit, body and
soul, are two phases of the same substance; the universe is infinite; beyond the visible world there is an infinity of other
worlds, each of which is inhabited; this terrestrial globe has a soul; in fact, each and every part of it, mineral as well as plant
23
Seveda niso razli ne (in tolikokrat usodne) samo katoliške in protestantske interpretacije
besedil. Svojsko mnenje o razli nosti evangeljskih teologij (znotraj sebe in njihovem odnosu
do biblijskih tekstov Nove zaveze) in težko opravi ljivost »razlik« med njimi je nedavno
izpri al veliki evangeljski strokovnjak Dr. Ben Witherington v lanku The Problem with Evangelical
Theologies.53
and animal, is animated; all matter is made up of the same elements (no distinction between terrestrial and celestial matter);
all souls are akin (transmigration is, therefore, not impossible). This unitary point of view is Bruno's justification of "natural
magic." No doubt, the attempt to establish a scientific continuity among all the phenomena of nature is an important
manifestation of the modern spirit, and interesting, especially on account of its appearance at the moment when the medieval
point of view was being abandoned. And one can readily understand how Bruno's effort to establish a unitary concept of
nature commanded the admiration of such men as Spinoza, Jacobi, and Hegel. On the other hand, the exaggerations, the
limitations, and the positive errors of his scientific system; his intolerance of even those who were working for the reforms to
which he was devoted; the false analogies, fantastic allegories, and sophistical reasonings into which his emotional fervour
often betrayed him have justified, in the eyes of many, Bayle's characterization of him as "the knight-errant of philosophy."
His attitude of mind towards religious truth was that of a rationalist. Personally, he failed to feel any of the vital significance
of Christianity as a religious system. It was not a Roman Inquisitor, but a Protestant divine, who said of him that he was "a
man of great capacity, with infinite knowledge, but not a trace of religion."
»Part of the problem is the temptation to form our theology almost independently of doing our exegesis. We
run to the biblical text to shore up or find proof texts for things we already believe. In addition, we are all
children of the Enlightenment, so we've tended to treat the Bible as if it were a history of ideas, where topics like
soteriology, justification, the new birth, sanctification, going on to perfection, and glorification were the main
themes, and our job was to link one idea to another. But in Scripture, we're not talking about a history of ideas
but about spiritual realities in people's lives, about people who have stories and encounters with God. If you
read the Bible carefully, on or below the surface of all of these texts is narrative, especially the story of Christ,
but also the Old Testament stories of Adam and Moses and Abraham, and the story of Christians as recounted in
Acts and elsewhere in the New Testament. I think part of the problem is that we are still doing theology in an
Enlightenment frame of mind, as if it were a string of ideas that we should logically link together, and once
we've produced a nice logical circle, then we're home free. The truth is that life is a lot messier than that, and the
Bible is more about stories than the history of ideas that are embedded in the stories.« Nekatera ostala njegova
zenimiva dela: The New Testament Story. 2004. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company.
The Gospel Code: Novel Claims About Jesus, Mary Magdalene and DaVinci. 2004.
Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press.
Paul’s Letter to the Romans, A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary. With Darlene Hyatt.
2004. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
The Brother of Jesus. The Dramatic Story and Meaning of the First Archaeological Link
to Jesus & His Family. With Hershel Shanks. 2003. Updated and expanded edition. San Francisco: Harper
Publishing Company.
Revelation. 2003. The New Cambridge Bible Commentary. Ben Witherington III,
General Editor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
The Poetry of Piety, An Annotated Anthology of Christian Poetry. With Christopher
Mead Armitage. 2002. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.
The Shadow of the Almighty, Father, Son and Spirit in Biblical Perspective. With Laura
M. Ice. 2002. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
New Testament History, A Narrative Account. 2001. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic/
Carlisle: Paternoster Press.
The Gospel of Mark, A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary. 2001. Grand Rapids: William B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company.
The Realm of the Reign, Reflections on the Dominion of God. 1999. Nashville:
Discipleship Resources.
Jesus the Seer, The Progress of Prophecy. 1999. Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers.
The Many Faces of the Christ, The Christologies of the New Testament and Beyond.
1998. New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company.
Grace in Galatia, A Commentary on Paul’s Letter to the Galatians. 1998. Grand
Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company/Edinburgh: T & T Clark.The Paul Quest, The Renewed
24
9. Ali je še kakšna stvar, poleg teh, ki jih omenjam, za Psalme posebej zna ilna? Da,
vsekakor! - Gre pravzaprav za posebnost Hebrejske poezije, to je tako imenovani miselni
paralelizem, ki ga je Zahodni svet »uo il« zelo pozno54, v 18. stoletju; poleg tega pa moram
omeniti še njihov zna ilni ritem in rimo.
Kdo še ni videl Judov pri molitvi? Judovska molitev (nekoliko manj izrazito kot v Islamu), je
molitev gibanja celega telesa, duše in duha. Besedilu se tako organsko pridružuje gesta, gibanje,
zvok recitacije ali petja (z vsemi zna ilnostmi in dinamizmi vsakega od njih). Te celovitosti v
naših na inih recitiranja zlepa ne moremo dose i. Nekaj tega pa dosežemo v lepem petju
Psalmov.55
10. Psalmi so pesmi, zato so namenjeni petju. Petje pa, sami vemo, ni isto kot recitiranje.
Marija skoz' življenje je pesem – kadar jo pojemo jo povsem druga e doživljamo, kot e bi jo
nekdo zaspano bral...
Psalme se torej u imo na pamet, kot druge pesmi, ki jih pojemo pri bogoslužju. Ne znam si
predstavljati, kako bi nekdo navdušeno pel, e mora šele brati... Kdor šele bere, ta je šele na
poti k osvajanju besedila. Pojem tedaj, ko je besedilo že v meni; ko sem ga že duhovno
osvojil, ko je del moje duhovnosti, ko omogo a, da tvorno sodelujem pri živem bogoslužju
Cerkve ali (za Juda, sinagoge).
II. DEL: SVET SIMBOLOV
Osnovne zna ilnosti
1. Kaj so simboli in katere so njihove zna ilnosti?
Razli ne znanosti in sodobne znanstvene panoge (antropologija, kultura, kritika umetnosti,
psihologija, medicina, sodobni marketing, propaganda, politika...) in razli ni znanstveniki vse
ve govore o simbolih. Sodobna sredstva v katerih dominira slika so bolj in bolj približala
tudi simbole, pa ne samo v kolikor bi bili vezani za sliko, ampak toliko bolj, kolikor zadevajo
Search for the Jew of Tarsus. 1998. Downers Grove:
InterVarsity Press.
The Acts of the Apostles, A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary. 1998. Grand Rapids:
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company/Carlisle: Paternoster Press.
John’s Wisdom, A Commentary on the Fourth Gospel. 1995. Louisville:
Westminster/John Knox Press.
The Jesus Quest, The Third Search for the Jew of Nazareth. 1995. Downers Grove:
InterVarsity Press.
Conflict and Community in Corinth, A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2
Corinthians. 1995. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company/Carlisle: Paternoster Press.
Jesus the Sage, The Pilgrimage of Wisdom. 1994. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Press.
Paul’s Narrative Thought World, The Tapestry of Tragedy and Triumph. 1994.
Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press.
Friendship and Finances in Philippi, The Letter of Paul to the Philipppians. 1994.
Valley Forge: Trinity Press International.
54
Lowth R., leta 1753; odkril je miselni paralelizem v hebrejski pesniški obliki. Ponavadi gre za distih in
tristih. Dopovedi si vrste v sinonimnem ali antiteti nem razmerju. Kot že ime pove, je stih sinonimen tedaj, e z
drugimi besedami in podobami in simboli ponovi, kar je bilo re eno prej. Antiteti en pa tedaj, e drugi izrazi
pravo nasprotje prvega. Gre torej za izjemno važno posebnost hebrejskega pesništva. Dejansko tistega, ki
besedilo recitira, ta oblika dobesedno zaziblje v globino, utrdi pomen in ga notranje prepri uje. Simboli pa to
utrjevanje tudi globinsko dopolnijo. Tako je lovek ves »V« besedilu in besedilo isto in na najgloblji na in v
njem.
55
Na to bi morali biti pozorni v osebni pobožnosti. V Psalmih dosežemo duhovne vsebine vse druga e kot v
rožnem vencu ali kakšni drugi sekundarni pobožnosti. Posebej pa moramo biti na to pozorni znotraj bogoslužja,
saj bi zlepa ne smeli zamenjevati besedila Psalmov z drugimi besedili. Dokumenti 2. vat. koncila (B in CG)
nikakor ne smejo biti brez vpliva na naše bogoslužje in zavest.
25
loveško sporazumevanje (komunikacijo in z njo povezane sodobne znanosti), psihoanalizo in
filmsko produkcijo modernih mitov. Prav mit – e isto na kratko povem, ki ga je polpretekla
protestantska eksegeza tako reko imela za nerabnega v besedilu Pisma ( veljavna bibli na
ekzegeza naj bi namre izlo ila vse, kar je miti no)56, sedaj dobiva svojo pravo podobo
znotraj besedil, ne le bibli nih). To velja tudi za pristop k sodobni kulturi slike, medijev...
Torej: Mnoge stvari so se, v hitri dinamiki razvoja, danes postavile isto na glavo... Razli nost
bibli nih ekzegez in drugih interpretacij (v teologiji...) in njihove veljavnosti moramo torej
dokaj kriti no presojati. Literature na tem podro ju je dovolj.57
2. Simbol moramo najprej razlikovati od znamenja. Najve ja ne-podobnost in povsem
druga nost je prav ta, da je znamenje zamenljivo (arbitrarno), vsi simboli pa koreninijo v
usajenem dnu naše biti.
Simboli so po pravici v sredini slehernega ustvarjalnega življenja in so njegovo živo jedro.
Odkrivajo nam skrivnosti nezavednega, vodijo nas do najskrivnejših in najbolj zakritih gibal
delovanja in odpirajo našega duha k nepoznanemu in neskon nemu. So tako reko garanti
presežnega (transcendentnega).
Podnevi in pono i, ko govorimo, ko se izražamo s kretnjami ali ko sanjamo, se jih
poslužujemo, pa naj bi se tega zavedali ali ne. Oni dejansko oblikujejo naše želje, vspodbude
v nas to ali ono dejavnost, vodijo naše postopke in so za etek našega uspeha58 in tudi
neuspehov. Zadnji as je vse ve raziskav, ki se posve ajo stukturam imaginarnega in
funkcijam naše fantazije, ki seveda po ivajo na simbolni dejavnosti našega duhovnega
ustroja. Lahko bi rekli, da vse duhovne znanosti, vse umetnosti in vse umetniške tehnike
sre ujejo na svoji poti simbole. Vsaka od njih se mora od njih pou iti in dolo iti svoj odnos
do njih. Premalo je, e re emo, da živimo v svetu simbolov – bolje je in bolj natan no: svet
simbolov živi v nas.
Simboli »odkrivajo pokrivajo in odkrivajo skrivajo« (G. Gurvitch).
Iz teh danosti torej simboli, ki jih zasledimo v Psalmih živo delujejo na nas in na našo skupnost
(oltarno ob estvo), e jih vneto pojemo.
Nadaljujem!
2. a. Slika simbolov
Simboli na slika je razli na od vseh ostalih. Razli na je torej od tega, kar imenujemo emblem59,
atribut60, alegorija61, metafora62, analogija63, simptom64, apolog65 in parabola66. Vse te bi lahko
56
Tovrstna eksegeza je danes besedovanje za staro šaro! Prinesla pa je, nedvomno, tudi vrsto novosti, ki so
sprejemljive.
57
Tisti, ki se ne ustrašite poglobljenega študija in literature v tujih jezikih, želim širiti pogled s temi deli: Otto
Betz, Zur tiefer Wahrnehmung des Lebens (it. Prevod nosi druga en naslov: I simboli per comunicare
l'esperienza e la fede ). Fegus Kerr, La teologia dopo Wittgenstein. G. Mura, Ermeneutica e verita. Paul
Ricoeur, Linguaggio e simbolo nelle parole di Gesu. G. Sini, A. Molinaro, P. Ricoeur, Il conflitto delle
ermeneutiche.Groupe D'Entrevernes, Segni e parole, semiotica e testo evangelico. P. Ricoeur, Il conflitto delle
interpretazioni.I limiti dell'interpretazione. Ko boste prebrali to, boste morali prebrati še sto naslednjih.
58
Durand Gilbert, Strutture antropologiche dell'immaginario. Introduzione all'archetipologia generale. ISTI:
Introduction à la mythodologie (mythes et sociétés),1996.
59
Emblemi so danes dokaj znani. Lovor je emblem slave, asti, zastava emblem domovine, naroda... To je torej
viden lik, ki ga osvojimo z dogovori, da bi predstavljal neko idejo, fizi no ali moralno bitje.
60
Atribut je predmet ali slika, ki osebi, skupnosti ali moralnemu bitju služi kot znamenje prepoznavanja.
Izbiramo del, ki ozna uje celoto – železniško kolo za Železnice, krilo za letasko družbo, tehtnico za pravno
ustanovo...
61
Alegorija. Najve krat gre za lik loveka, živali ali rastline, ki želi prikazati kakšno stališ e, krepost, odpravo.
Rog napolnjen z razli nim sadjem – je alegorija blaginje. Krilati sel – znanilec zmage. Henry Corbin nam
zna ilno in precizno predstavi razliko med alegorijo in simbolom: »Alegorija je racionalno po etje, ki ne
26
imenovali ohlajeni simbol – in vsi govore iz znamenjske ravni. Vsem znakom je namre skupna
zna ilna arbitrarnost, kot sem že poudaril. V znamenju torej ozna itelj in ozna eno ostajata eden
drugemu tuja, medtem kot v simbolu naziramo homogenost ozna itelja in ozna enega v smislu
dinami ne organizacije, kot poudarja G. Durand.67 V skladu z drugimi zanstveniki (C. G. Jung,
Piaget68, Gaston Bachelard69... Ferdinand de Saussure70). Durand o tej oranizacijski strukturi
predstavlja prehoda na novi nivo bitja in prav tako ne v novo globino zavesti; gre za vedno isti nivo tega, kar je
sicer dobro poznano na nek druga en na in. Simbol pa ni ve na racionalnem nivoju, predstavlja namre šifro
skrivnosti; je edini na in, da povemo tisto kar bi sicer v dopovedovanju nikakor ne mogli dose i, vendar tako,
da ni nikdar do konca razjasnjen, moramo ga namre vedno na novo odstirati, tako kot (približno) partituro, ki je
sicer z vsako izvedbo isto-druga na in sama terja novih izvedb.« Primerjaj Corbin H., L'imagination creatrice...
Pariz 1958.
62
Metafora razvija primerjavo med dvemi bitji ali dvema situacijama in zato v pravem govorniku izbruhne v
pravi poplavi besed. Je torej vezno besedovanje, igar mo ni samo notanja asociativnost, ampak silne
zakonitosti jezika (langue) samega in komunikacije.
63
Analogija živi iz primerjave dveh razli nosti (razli nih bitij), ki pa naj bi imela neko skupno to ko v tem, kar
primerjam. lovekova jeza in Božja jeza – na primer. Seveda je to primerjanje tudi izvor velikih napak v našem
loveškem razmišljanju. »Moje misli niso vaše misli in moja pota niso vaša pota, govori Gospod«, po preroku.
64
Simptom je tista sprememba v zunanjem izgledu ali ustaljenem delovanju, ki odkriva kakšen defekt ali
protislovje; sindrom je skupek simptomov, ki so zna ilni za neko stanje v razvoju, ki ve ali manj govore o
ne em bodo em, kar bo sledilo...
65
Apolog je basen, zna ilna govorica živali, ki pou ujejo ali govore loveku.
66
Parabola je tista pripoved, ki ima (nosi) smisel sama po sebi, ne da bi se je bilo potrebno lotiti razlagati,
vendar je njena naloga da sugerira bolj mo no to, kakor bi sicer razložena pomenila. Prilika o dobrem o etu in
izgubljenem sinu, prilika o semenu, ki pada na dobro zemljo..., o izgubljeni ovci...
67
Strukture imaginarnega, str. 20.
68
(Ph) W. Enc.:Jean Piaget (August 9, 1896 – September 16, 1980) was a Swiss developmental
psychologist, famous for working out a universal sequence of stages of cognitive development, and notable for
his idea that children (and indeed adults) are continually generating theories about the external world (which are
kept or dismissed depending on whether we see them working or not in practice).
Piaget became a professor of psychology at the University of Geneva from 1929 to 1975 and is best known for
organizing cognitive development into a series of stages-- the levels of development corresponding to infancy,
childhood, and adolescence. These four stages are labeled the Sensorimotor stage, which occurs from birth to age
two, (children experience through their senses), the Preoperational stage, which occurs from ages two to seven
(motor skills are acquired), the Concrete operational stage, which occurs from ages seven to eleven (children
think logically about concrete events), and the Formal Operational stage, which occurs after age eleven (abstract
reasoning is developed here). Advancement through these levels was explained through biology and culture
along with a "third factor" called equilibration, working inter-dependently with the other two.
His Influence
Piaget's theory of cognitive development has proved influential, notably on the work of Lev Vygotsky and of Lawrence Kohlberg. Among
others, the philosopher and social theorist Jürgen Habermas has incorporated it into his work, most notably in The Theory of Communicative
Action. Piaget also had a considerable impact in the field of computer science and artificial intelligence. Seymour Papert used Piaget's work
while developing the Logo programming language. Alan Kay used Piaget's theories as the basis for the Dynabook programming system
concept, which was first discussed within the confines of the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, or Xerox PARC. These discussions led to the
development of the Alto prototype, which explored for the first time all the elements of the graphical user interface (GUI), and influenced the
creation of user interfaces in the 1980's and beyond. The philosopher Thomas Kuhn credited Piaget's work in helping him understanding the
transition between modes of thought which characterised his theory of paradigm shifts.
Piaget has had a substantial impact on approaches to education. In Conversations with Jean Piaget, he says: "Education, for most people,
means trying to lead the child to resemble the typical adult of his society... But for me, education means making creators... You have to make
inventors, innovators, not conformists." (Bringuier, 1980, p.132).
69
(Ph.) W. Enc.: Gaston Bachelard (June 27, 1884- October 16, 1962) was a French philosopher and poet who
rose to some of the most prestiguous positions in the French academy despite his humble origins.
Life and work
Bachelard was a postmaster (see mail) in Bar-Sur-Aube before studying physics and then finally becoming interested in
philosophy. He was a professor at Dijon from 1930 to 1940 and then became the inaugural chair of history and philosophy of
the sciences at the Sorbonne.
Bachelard's studies of the history and philosophy of science in such works as Le nouvel esprit scientifique and La formation
de l'esprit scientifique was based on his vision of historical epistemology as a kind of psychoanalysis of the scientific mind.
He argued against positivism and influential forms of neo-Kantianism that science always leaves epistemology behind. Kant
and Comte had simply extrapolated on the work of Newton, but Newton had been left behind by the Theory of Relativity.
This position should not be confused with empiricism. Bachelard was a rationalist in the Cartesian sense. Thomas S. Kuhn
27
poudarja: »Imaginacija nikakor ni sposobnost oblikovanja slike, ampak dinami na mo ki oblikuje
pragmati ne kopije, ki jih posreduje percepcija in ta preoblikovana dinami nost util postaja celoviti
temelj celovitega in vseobjemajo ega psihi nega življenja posameznika. Lahko torej re emo, da ...
ima simbol enega in ve umetno danih smislov, vendar ohranja osnovno in spontano mo (odmeva)
reagiranja.71. G. Bachelard pa še bolj dolo neje pravi: » Ta odmev nas neprestano prisiljuje na
poglabljanje našega bivanja... ker ustvari obrat celotnega bitja«.72 Simbol je tako resni ni tvorec
novega. Ne zadovolji se samo s tem, da izzove nove odmeve, ampak poziva na preobraženje v globini
psihe – o tem bom ve povedal v peti to ki z naslovom Simboli ni dinamizem in njegove dejavnosti.
Simbol je tako kot smo videli, mnogo ve kot navadno znamenje, saj je izpolnjen z našimi afekti in
svojsko dinamiko. Ne samo da prekrivajo predo uje ampak tudi gradi, ko ruši. Simbolna slika (za
razliko od znamenjske) se sploh ne giblje na nivoju intelektualnega, ampak ostaja v samem središ u h
kateremu teži vsa spiha, ki ga ta osedinja. Z znakom ostajamo na isti in enako odrejeni poti, simbol pa
nas odvede na drugo raven, ker uvaja nov red ve kratnih dimenzij. Simboli so torej sestavljeni,
nedolo eni, vendar funkcionirajo v isti smeri in zato jih imenujemo tudi sisteme ali aksiomatske
slike.73
Simboli, ki tako nastopajo v Psalmih, poznajo te zna ilne dinamizme z vrstami dejavnosti, ki jih
omenjam.74
used Bachelard's notion of "epistemological rupture" as re-interpreted by Alexandre Koyré to develop his theory of paradigm
shifts.
In the English-speaking world, the connection Bachelard made between psychology and the history of science has been little
understood. His work is often perceived as dealing with many diverse topics such as poetry, dreams, psychoanalysis, and the
imagination, rather then the single topic of epistemology. His works on The Psychoanalysis of Fire and The Poetics of Space
are among the most popular of his works in English.
70
Najkrajša predstavitev W Enc. : Ferdinand de Saussure (November 26, 1857 - February 22, 1913) was a
Swiss linguist. Born in Geneva, he laid the foundation for many developments in linguistics in the 20th century.
He perceived linguistics as a branch of a general science of signs he proposed to call semiology (now generally
known as semiotics).
His work Cours de linguistique générale (Course in General Linguistics) was published posthumously in 1916
by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye based on lecture notes. This became one of the seminal linguistics works
of the 20th century. Its central notion is that language can be analyzed as a formal system of organized
difference, apart from the messy dialectics of realtime production and comprehension. Additionally, at a very
young age he published a very important work in Indo-European philology which put forward what is now
known as the laryngeal theory. It has been argued that the problem of trying to explain how he himself was able
to make systematic predictive hypotheses from known linguistic data to unknown linguistic data, stimulated his
development of structuralism.
His work had two receptions which developed it in two very different ways. In America it flowered as developed
by Leonard Bloomfield into distributionalism, and has since then been presupposed by all linguistic science.
This Saussurean influence, however, has been disavowed by Noam Chomsky, among others. In contemporary
developments, it has been most explicitly developed by Michael Silverstein who has combined it with the
theories of markedness and distinctive features the Prague School (most importantly Nikolay Trubetzkoy and
Roman Jakobson invented for the plane of analysis of phonology, the Sapir-Whorfian theory of the
grammatical category, and the insight of transformational analysis, in order to analyze the plane of Saussurean
sense proper. In Europe, important contributions were quickly made by Emile Benveniste, Antoine Meillet, and
Andre Martinet, among others. However, structuralism was soon picked up and calqued by students of other,
non-linguistic aspects of culture, such as Roland Barthes, Jacques Lacan, and Claude Lévi-Strauss. Their
expansive interpretations of Saussure's theories, and their application of those theories to non-linguistic fields of
study led to theoretical difficulties, eventually causing proclamations of the "death" of structuralism in those
disciplines.
Zapomni si: "A sign is the basic unit of langue (a given language at a given time). Every langue is a complete
system of signs. Parole (the speech of an individual) is an external manifestation of langue."
71
Isti v istem delu, na str. 20-21.
G. Bachelard, Poetika prostora.
73
Prim. Chevalier J. (teolog in filozof),Dictionary of Symbols, I-IX.
74
Seveda – naj poudarim – simboli nastopajo znotraj vsega bibli nega besedila Stare in Nove zaveze. Tu se hote
omejujem na Psalme.
72
28
3. Arhetipski simboli
Posebej naj spregovorim tudi o arhetipskih simbolih.
Freud o simbolih govori kot o naravnih fantazmah. V njih psihoanaliza prepoznava oraganizatorje
fantazmati nega življenja, ki niso odvisni od osebnih izkustev subjektov. Univerzalnost le teh Freud
razlaga kot nekaj, kar izvira iz samega filogenetskega razvoja loveka.
C. G: JUNG75 je to pojmovanje znatno poglobil. Eidolo-gibala je posebej ozna il kot arhetipske
simbole76, ki mu predstavljajo prototipe simbolnih enot, ki so tako globoko usajeni v nezavedno, da
75
W. Enc.: Carl Gustav Jung ( 1875, Kesswil, Switzerland– 1961, Küsnacht) was a Swiss psychiatrist and
founder of Analytical Psychology. His approach to human psychology emphasized understanding the psyche
through exploring the world of dreams, art, mythology, world religion and philosophy. He was a strong believer
in the importance of integration of opposites (e.g. masculine and feminine, thinking and feeling, science and
spirituality). Though not the first to analyze dreams, his contributions to dream analysis were influential and
extensive. Although he was a theoretical psychologist and practicing clinician for most of his life, many of his
studies extend into other realms of the humanities: from comparative religion and philosophy, to criticism of art
and literature. (Interestingly, Jungian ideas are seldom mentioned in college psychology courses while they are
often explored in humanities courses.)
Pravi uvid v globino in posledi nost moje opombe zgoraj daje šele Jungova bibliografija:
Jung, C. G. (1902–1905). Psychiatric Studies. Collected Works Vol. 1. 1953 ed. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, and Princeton, N.J.:
Bollingen. This was the first of 18 volumes plus separate bibliography and index. Not including revisions the set was completed in 1967.
Jung, C. G. (1904–1907) Studies in Word Association. London: Routledge & K. Paul. (contained in Experimental Researches, Collected
Works Vol. 2)
Jung, C. G. (1907). The Psychology of Dementia Praecox. (2nd ed. 1936) New York: Nervous and Mental Disease Publ. Co. (contained in
The Psychogenesis of Mental Disease, Collected Works Vol. 3)
Jung, C. G. (1907–1958). The Psychogenesis of Mental Disease. 1991 ed. London: Routledge. (Collected Works Vol. 3)
Jung, C. G., & Hinkle, B. M. (1912). Psychology of the Unconscious : a study of the transformations and symbolisms of the libido, a
contribution to the history of the evolution of thought. London: Kegan Paul Trench Trubner. (revised in 1952 as Symbols of Transformation,
Collected Works Vol.5 ISBN 0691018154)
Jung, C. G., & Long, C. E. (1917). Collected Papers on Analytical Psychology (2nd ed.). London: Balliere Tindall & Cox. (contained in
Freud and Psychoanalysis, Collected Works Vol. 4)
Jung, C. G. (1917, 1928). Two Essays on Analytical Psychology (1966 revised 2nd ed. Collected Works Vol. 7). London: Routledge.
Jung, C. G., & Baynes, H. G. (1921). Psychological Types, or, The Psychology of Individuation. London: K. Paul Trench Trubner.
(Collected Works Vol.6 ISBN 0691018138)
Jung, C. G., Baynes, H. G., & Baynes, C. F. (1928). Contributions to Analytical Psychology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Jung, C. G., & Shamdasani, S. (1932). The Psychology of Kundalini Yoga: notes of a seminar by C.G. Jung. 1996 ed. Princeton, N.J.:
Princeton University Press.
Jung, C. G. (1933). Modern Man in Search of a Soul. London: Kegan Paul Trench Trubner, (1955 ed. Harvest Books ISBN 0156612062)
Jung, C. G., (1934–1954). The Archetypes and The Collective Unconscious. (1981 2nd ed. Collected Works Vol.9 Part 1), Princeton, N.J.:
Bollingen. ISBN 0691018332
Jung, C. G. (1938). Psychology and Religion The Terry Lectures. New Haven: Yale University Press. (contained in Psychology and
Religion: West and East Collected Works Vol. 11 ISBN 0691097720).
Jung, C. G., & Dell, S. M. (1940). The Integration of the Personality. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Jung, C. G. (1944). Psychology and Alchemy (2nd ed. 1968 Collected Works Vol. 12 ISBN 0691018316). London: Routledge.
Jung, C. G. (1947). Essays on Contemporary Events. London: Kegan Paul.
Jung, C. G. (1947, revised 1954). On the Nature of the Psyche. 1988 ed. London: Ark Paperbacks. (contained in Collected Works Vol. 8)
Jung, C. G. (1951). Aion: Researches into the Phenomenology of the Self (Collected Works Vol. 9 Part 2). Princeton, N.J.: Bollingen. ISBN
069101826X
Jung, C. G. (1952). Synchronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle. 1973 2nd ed. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, ISBN
0691017948 (contained in Collected Works Vol. 8)
Jung, C. G. (1956). Mysterium Coniunctionis: An Inquiry into the Separation and Synthesis of Psychic Opposites in Alchemy. London:
Routledge. (2nd ed. 1970 Collected Works Vol. 14 ISBN 0691018162) This was Jung's last book length work, completed when he was
eighty.
Jung, C. G. (1957). The Undiscovered Self (Present and Future). 1959 ed. New York: American Library. 1990 ed. Bollingen ISBN
0691018944 (also contained in collected Works Vol. 10)
Jung, C. G., & De Laszlo, V. S. (1958). Psyche and Symbo: A Selection from the Writings of C.G. Jung. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.
Jung, C. G., & De Laszlo, V. S. (1959). Basic Writings. New York: Modern Library.
Jung, C. G., & Jaffe A. (1962). Memories, Dreams, Reflections. London: Collins. This is Jung's autobiography, recorded and edited by
Aniela Jaffe, ISBN 0679723951
Jung, C. G., Evans, R. I., & Jones, E. (1964). Conversations with Carl Jung and Reactions from Ernest Jones. New York: Van Nostrand.
Jung, C. G., & Franz, M.-L. v. (1964). Man and His Symbols. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, ISBN 0440351839
Jung, C. G. (1966). The Practice of Psychotherapy: Essays on the Psychology of the Transference and other Subjects (Collected Works Vol.
16). Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Jung, C. G. (1967). The Development of Personality. 1991 ed. London: Routledge. Collected Works Vol. 17 ISBN 0691018383
Jung, C. G. (1970). Four Archetypes; Mother, Rebirth, Spirit, Trickster. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. (contained in Collected
Works Vol. 9 part 1)
Jung, C. G. (1974). Dreams. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press (compilation from Collected Works Vols. 4, 8, 12, 16), ISBN
0691017921
Jung, C. G., & Campbell, J. (1976). The Portable Jung. a compilation, New York: Penguin Books. ISBN 0140150706
Jung, C. G., Rothgeb, C. L., Clemens, S. M., & National Clearinghouse for Mental Health Information (U.S.). (1978). Abstracts of the
Collected Works of C.G. Jung. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Printing Office.
29
skoraj v celoti tvorijo njegovo strukturo v engramih. Ti so v naši duši kot predoblikovalni modeli, ki
so taksonomno urejeni in kateri vnašajo red (teleonomsko), to je tiste strukturirane, predstavne in
ustvene celote, polne dinamike, ki zna preoblikovati.
Arhetipski simboli so torej dejansko »univerzalno loveško«. Tudi Jung meni, da gre za »vrojene in
pogojene (podedovane) psihi ne strukture, ki je »neka zvrst »kolektivne zavesti«. Izražajo se v
posameznih simbolih s posebno dinami no nabojno preoblikovalno silo in imajo zato razvojno in
poedinjujo o mo v razvoju osebnosti. »Arhetip je efektivna možnost obnavljanja podobnih ali vsaj
analognih idej...ali strukturalni pogoj, ki se nahaja v psihi, ki je spet, na dolo en na in povezana z
možgani...«.77 Arhetipski simbol povezuje univerzalno in individualno.
Jung, C. G., & Antony Storr ed., (1983) The Essential Jung. a compilation, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, ISBN 0-691-02455-3
Jung, C. G. (1986). Psychology and the East. London: Ark. (contained in Collected Works Vol. 11)
Jung, C. G. (1987). Dictionary of Analytical Psychology. London: Ark Paperbacks.
Jung, C. G. (1988). Psychology and Western Religion. London: Ark Paperbacks. (contained in Collected Works Vol. 11)
Jung, C. G., Wagner, S., Wagner, G., & Van der Post, L. (1990). The World Within C.G. Jung in his own words [videorecording]. New
York, NY: Kino International : Dist. by Insight Media.
Jung, C. G., & Hull, R. F. C. (1991). Psychological Types (a revised ed.). London: Routlege.
Jung, C. G., & Chodorow, J. (1997). Jung on Active Imagination. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Jung, C. G., & Jarrett, J. L. (1998). Jung's Seminar on Nietzsche's Zarathustra (Abridged ed.). Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Jung, C. G., & Pauli, Wolfgang, C. A. Meier (Editor). (2001). Atom and Archetype : The Pauli/Jung Letters, 1932-1958, Princeton, N.J.:
Princeton University Press. ISBN 0691012075
Jung, C. G., & Sabini, M. (2002). The Earth Has a Soul: the nature writings of C.G. Jung. Berkeley, Calif.: North Atlantic Books.
76
Enc. PSIH.( W. Enc.): Jung's concept of the collective unconscious has often been misunderstood. In order to understand
this concept, it is essential to understand his idea of the archetype, something foreign to the highly rational, scientificallyoriented Western mind. Here is a useful analogy: the collective unconscious is the DNA of the human psyche. Just as all
humans share a common physical heritage and predisposition towards specific physical forms (like having two legs, a heart,
etc.) so do all humans have a common psychological predisposition. Our physical predispostions are determined by our
DNA, while our psychological predispositions are stored in the collective unconscious. Like the human genome project that
took on the tremedous labor of analyzing the information stored in the human DNA, Jung took on the task of exploring and
attempting to discern the mysteries stored in the collective unconscious.
However, unlike the simple, quantifiable information that composes DNA (in the form of coded sequences of nucleotides),
the collective unconscious is composed of archetypes. In sharp contrast to the objective material world, the world of the
archetypes can not be adequately understood through quantitative modes of research. Instead it can only begin to be revealed
through an examination of the symbolic communications of the human psyche--in art, dreams, religion, myth, and the themes
of human relational/behavioral patterns. Devoting his life to the task of exploring and understanding the collective
unconscious, Jung discovered that certain symbolic themes existed across all cultures, all epochs, and in every individual.
Together these symbolic themes comprise "the archetypes of the collective unconscious."
77
L'homme a la decouverte de son ame, Geneve 1946, str.196.
30
S tem v zvezi naj samo omenim
78
tudi mite78, ki se pojavljajo kakor dramaturška transpozicijo
(W. Enc.)The word mythology (from the Greek
mythología, from
mythologein to
relate myths, from
mythos, meaning a narrative, and
logos, meaning speech or argument) literally
means the (oral) retelling of myths – stories that a particular culture believes to be true and that use the
supernatural to interpret natural events and to explain the nature of the universe and humanity. The modern
definition of mythology primarily the body of myths from a particular culture or religion, as in Greek mythology,
Egyptian mythology or Norse mythology. Mythology is also the branch of knowledge dealing with the
collection, study and interpretation of myths.
Formation of myths
What forces create myths? Robert Graves said of Greek myth: "True myth may be defined as the reduction to
narrative shorthand of ritual mime performed on public festivals, and in many cases recorded pictorially." (The
Greek Myths, Introduction). Graves was deeply influenced, perhaps too strongly, by Sir James George Frazer's
mythography The Golden Bough, and he would have agreed that myths are generated by many cultural needs
(more on the forces that generate myth is needed).
Myths authorize the cultural institutions of a tribe, a city, or a nation by connecting them with universal truths.
Myths justify the current occupation of a territory by a people, for instance.
All cultures have developed over time their own myths, consisting of narratives of their history, their religions,
and their heroes. The great power of the symbolic meaning of these stories for the culture is a major reason why
they survive as long as they do, sometimes for thousands of years. Mâche (1992, p.20) distinguishes between
"myth, in the sense of this primary psychic image, with some kind of mytho-logy, or a system of words trying
with varying success to ensure a certain coherence between these images.
A collection of myths is called a mythos, e.g. 'the Roman mythos.' A collection of those is called a mythoi, e.g.
'the Greek and Roman mythoi.' One notable type is the creation myth, which describes how that culture believes
the universe was created. Another is the Trickster myth, which concerns itself with the pranks or tricks played by
gods or heroes.
Joseph Campbell was considered by some people to be the world's leading authority on myth and the history of
spirituality. Roger Caillois (1972) contrasts myths of situations determined from outside by historical events with
myths of heroes determined from inside by their psychic life. However Mâche (1992, p.10) argues that, "on this
level he [Caillois] refers only to the presentation of images in the form of stories, which in themselves are more
ancient than stories, not yet submitted to this kind of distinction."
Myths as depictions of historical events
Although myths are often considered to be accounts of events that have not happened, many historians consider
that myths can also be accounts of actual events that have become highly imbued with symbolic meaning, or that
have been transformed, shifted in time or place, or even reversed. One way of conceptualizing this process is to
view 'myths' as lying at the far end of a continuum ranging from a 'dispassionate account' to 'legendary
occurrence' to 'mythical status'. As an event progresses towards the mythical end of this continuum, what people
think, feel and say about the event takes on progressively greater historical significance while the facts become
less important. By the time one reaches the mythical end of the spectrum the story has taken on a life of its own
and the facts of the original event have become almost irrelevant.
This method or technique of interpreting myths as accounts of actual events, euhemerist exegesis, dates from
antiguity and can be traced back (from Spencer) to Evhémère's Histoire sacrée (300 BCE) which describes the
inhabitants of the island of Panchaia, Everything-Good, in the Indian Ocean as normal people deified by popular
naivety. As Roland Barthes affirms, "Myth is a word chosen by history. It could not come from the nature of
things" (Mâche 1992, p.20).
This process occurs in part because the events described become detached from their original context and new
context is substituted, often through analogy with current or recent events. Some Greek myths originated in
Classical times to provide explanations for inexplicable features of local cult practices, to account for the local
epithet of one of the Olympian gods, to interpret depictions of half-remembered figures, events, or account for
the deities' attributes or entheogens, even to make sense of ancient icons, much as myths are invented to
"explain" heraldic charges, the origins of which has become arcane with the passing of time. Conversely,
descriptions of recent events are re-emphasised to make them seem to be analogous with the commonly known
story. This technique has been used by some religious conservatives in America with text from the Bible, notably
referencing the many prophecies in the Book of Revelation. It was also used during the Russian Communist era
in propaganda about political situations with misleading references to class struggles. Until WWII the fitness of
the Emperor of Japan was linked to his mythical distant descent from the Amaterasu, the goddess of the sun.
Mâche (1992, p.10) argues that euhemerist exegesis, "was applied to capture and seize by force of reason
qualities of thought, which eluded it on every side." This process, he argues, often leads to interpretation of
myths as "disguised propaganda in the service of powerful individuals," and that the purpose of myths in this
31
arhetipov, shem in simbolov, ali pa tudi kot sestavljene enote (epopeje, pripovedi, geneze,
kozmogonije, teogonije, gigantomahije) itd. Mircea Eliade79 vidi v mitu arhetipski model za vsa
view is to allow the "social order" to establish "its permanence on the illusion of a natural order." He argues
against this interpretation, saying that "what puts an end to this caricature of certain speeches from May 1968 is,
among other things, precisely the fact that roles are not distributed once and for all in myths, as would be the
case if they were a variant of the idea of an 'opium of the people.'"
Contra Barthes (quote above) Mâche (1992) argues that, "myth therefore seems to choose history, rather than
be chosen by it" (p.21), "beyond words and stories, myth seems more like a psychic content from which words,
gestures, and musics radiate. History only chooses for it more or less becoming clothes. And these contents surge
forth all the more vigorously from the nature of things when reason tries to repress them. Whatever the roles and
commentaries with which such and such a socio-historic movement decks out the mythic image, the latter lives a
largely autonomous life which continually fascinates humanity. To denounce archaism only makes sense as a
function of a 'progressive' ideology, which itself begins to show a certain archaism and an obvious naivety."
(p.20)
Other theories: "For Lévi-Strauss, myth is a structured system of signifiers, whose internal networks of
relationships are used to 'map' the structure of other sets of relationships; the 'content' is infinitely variable and
relatively unimportant." (Middleton 1990, p.222)
A modern interpretation of myths, primarily as indicators of astrononomical events, has been put forward in such
works as Hamlet's Mill: An Essay Investigating the Origins of Human Knowledge And It's Transmission
Through Myth by Giorgio De Santillana, Hertha Von Dechend (ISBN: 0879232153), and serves as a
counterpoint to numerous Jungian (often psychological or mystical) interpretations as put forward by Joseph
Campbell.
Catastrophists such as Immanuel Velikovsky believe that myths are derived from the oral histories of ancient
cultures that witnessed cosmic catastrophes. For example, Velikovsky believe the dragon represented a fiery
cosmic object such as a comet. Believers in catastrophism are only a small minority within the field of
mythology.
79
(Ph. Enc.): Mircea Eliade (March 9, 1907, Bucharest - April 22, 1986, Chicago, Illinois) was a Romanian
historian of religions and writer (fantasy and autobiographical). He commanded eight languages fluently
(Romanian, French, German, Italian, English, Hebrew, Persian and Sanskrit).
In 1928, at the University of Bucharest, he met Emil Cioran and Eugène Ionesco, and the three became, with
short interruptions, lifelong friends. Since the 1970s he has been criticized for his pre-war sympathies with
Garda de Fier (The Iron Guard), an extreme-right-wing political organization. However, his political views did
not have any great influence on his scholarly production, which began after a long period of study in India at the
University of Calcutta. Finding that the Maharaja of Kassimbazar sponsored European scholars to study in India,
Eliade applied and was granted an allowance for four years. In 1928 he sailed for Calcutta to study Sanskrit and
philosophy under Surendranath Dasgupta (1885-1952), a Cambridge educated Bengali professor at the
University of Calcutta, and author of a five volume History of Indian Philosophy. He went on to marry Professor
Dasgupta's daughter Uma.
In his work on the history of religion, he is most regarded for his writings on shamanism, yoga and cosmological
myths.
His thinking has been partly influenced by Rudolf Otto, Gerardus van der Leeuw, Nae Ionescu and the work of
the Traditionalist School. Mircea Eliade has had an decisive influence on many scholars, for instance Ioan Petru
Culianu. In Romania, Eliade's legacy in the field of history of religions is mirrored by the journal "Archaeus"
Od njegovih del naj vidimo le nekatera, najve ja:
Yoga, Immortality and Freedom. translated: W.R. Trask. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1958. First
published in French as Yoga: Essai sur l'origine de la mystique Indienne in 1933, this informative and scholarly
work analyses yoga as a concrete search for freedom from human limitations.
The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of Religion, translated from French: W.R. Trask, Harvest/HBJ
Publishers, 1957 ISBN 015679201X. Building on Rudolf Otto's 1917 work, The Idea of the Holy, and his own
previous work, Eliade shows how religion emerges from the experience of the sacred, and myths of time and
nature.
Cosmos and History:The Myth of the Eternal Return. translated: W.R. Trask. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press, 1954. Perhaps Eliade's most crucial and approachable short work. Contains his analysis of time as
heterogenous for the religious and homogenous for the non-religious and his conception of the 'terror of history'
and the ability to 'reactualize' religious time. Originally published as Le Mythe de l'eternel retour: archétypes et
répetition, 1949.
32
ustvarjanja in meni, da je cilj mitov ta, da »fiksirajo modele vseh najvažnejših podro ij lovekovega
ustvarjanja«. V zvezi z miti moramo tu omeniti vsaj še imeni L. Kolakovskega in H. G. Gadamerja in
njune teorije, ki so globlje zajele problematiko simbolnega v mitih in mit sam in tako pripomogle k
znanstvenemu emancipiranju in rehabilitaciji mitoloških prvin po protestantski »moderni eksegezi«, ki
je, kot sem poudaril, v marsi em že krepko zastarela.
Tudi J. Lacan80, e naj samo omenim, ima simboli no – poleg zamišljenega in stvarnega – za enega
od treh osnovnih registrov na podro ju psihoanalize. »Simboli no ozna uje razporejenost pojavov s
katerimi se ukvarja psihoanaliza, v kolikor so strukturirane kot govor«. C. L. Strauss pa pravi:
»Vsako kulturo lahko vzamemo kakor skupek simbolnih sistemov, kot so jezik, zakonska pravila,
ekonomski odnosi, religija...«81
Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy. Translated: W.R. Trask. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1964.
Long a standard work in the study of Shamanism, a detailed and valuable source of information on the
phenomenon. Originally published Le Chamanisme, 1951.
From Primitives To Zen .
The History of Religions section of the University of Chicago bears Mircea Eliade's name in recognition of his
wide contribution to the research on this subject.
80
(Enc. Psh): Jacques-Marie-Émile Lacan (April 13, 1901 – September 9, 1981) was a French psychoanalyst
and psychiatrist. His work, like most psychoanalytic work, owes a heavy debt to Sigmund Freud, but also drew
from a number of other fields, including linguistics, philosophy, and mathematics. This interdisciplinary focus in
his work has led him to be an important figure in many fields beyond psychoanalysis - particularly within critical
theory.
His central idea was that the assertion that the human subject is a creation of its use of language. From this
understanding Lacan develops his study of psychoanalysis and his treatment strategies. His work, while
controversial, continues to influence the development of psychoanalysis worldwide. In France and elsewhere
various "schools" of Lacanian thought have emerged.
Although there exist various competing emphases on Lacan's work among these "schools", all agree in the
fundamental importance of the unconscious. By structuring the options available to any speaking subject in the
articulation of his or her desires, the unconscious determines the very fabric of human life as we may come to
know it, according to Lacan.
Najvažnejša koncepta Lacanove misli na tem podro ju sta (povzetek po isti enciklopediji):
a.The Real, the Imaginary, and the Symbolic
Lacan also formulated the concepts of the Real, the Imaginary, and the Symbolic, which he used to describe the
elements of the psychic structure. Lacan's notion of the Real is a very difficult concept which he in his later years
worked to present in a structured, set-theory fashion, as mathemes. The Imaginary, or non-linguistic aspect of the
psyche, formulates human primitive self-knowledge while the Symbolic, his term for linguistic collaboration,
generates a community-wide reflection of primitive self-knowledge and creates the very first set of rules that
govern behavior. The Real is the unspeakable reality, always present but continually mediated through the
imaginary and the symbolic.
b. The mirror stage
The mirror stage is described in Lacan's essay, "The Mirror Stage as Formative of the I Function, as Revealed in
Psychoanalytic Experience," the first essay in his Ecrits. The essay describes the scene of a young child first
recognizes herself in the mirror. This moment is the first time the child concieves of herself as a self with a body,
instead of as a dissociated mass of body parts. But it also involves the child recognizing her lack of control over
their body, and involves the child identifying herself not as an internal subject but as an external object in the
mirror. This is the start of a lifelong process of identifying the self in terms of the other.
a. The other
In contrast to the dominant Anglo-American ego-psychologists of his time, Lacan considered the self as
something constituted in the "other," that is, the conception of the external. Lacan argued that the psychoanalytic
movement towards understanding the ego as an coherent force with dominion over a person's psyche in the was
rooted in a misunderstanding of Freud. In Lacan's view, the self remained in eternal internal conflict and that
only extensive self-deceit made the situation bearable.
His developmental theory of the objectified self was inspired by Ferdinand de Saussure's insights into the
relationship of the signifier and the signified - the role of language and reference in thought were central to his
formulations, particularly the symbolic.
81
Za oboje glej: Slovar psihoanalize, Pariz 1967, na str. 474 in 475.
33
Tako torej lahko doumemo vrednost simbolov znotraj posameznih besedil in njihove zakonitosti.
Imamo torej opravka z izjemno pomembno dejavnostjo simbolnega.
4. »Neulovljivost« simbolov in njihovo prekrivanje (razvrstitev)
Naj isto na kratko razložim tudi neulovljivost simbolnega sveta.
Simbol torej oživlja velike celote imaginarnega, arhetipe, mite in strukture podzavestnega. Že v
frojdovskem gledanju simbolno izraža bolj ali manj razpoznavne zakrite želje ali notranje psihi ne
spopade v zunanjem obnašanju. »Takoj ko lahko v nekem obnašanju opazimo vsaj dva razli na
pomena, pri katerem eden zamenjuje drugega tako, da ga isti asno pokriva in izraža, to zvezo takoj
lahko imenujemo simboli na« ( glej naprimer: Vocabulatire de la Psychanalyse, str. 477). Vendar
moramo vedeti, da na tem podro ju ni vse simbol. Sanje, na primer, niso vedno povsem simboli ne.
Za nas je važnejša Jungova misel, ki jo moram pod rtati, da »simbol ni ne skriva, ne pojasnjuje,
ampak usmerja izven sebe proti pomenu, ki še ni pomensko dolo en, je torej bolj slutnja, ki ga niti en
sam izraz jezika ne bi mogel povsem izraziti.« Simbolno torej ni le slika neke konfliktne situacije,
ampak je temeljni izraz psihe, da bi uresni ila svoje skrite možnosti. Vrednost simbolov se tako
potrjuje v prevladi znanega na poti proti neznanemu, zasukanem na pot k neizraznemu. Simbolno
je torej tisto razumevanje, ki nadgrajuje vsako razumljivo tolma enje in pri tem uokvirja neznane,
nerazumljive, misti ne, transcendentne, to je psihološke dejavnike. Dokler je ŽIV, simbol ostaja
najboljši možni izraz kakšnega dejstva. e ta »kaj pomeni« pokuka na plano in smo našli nov izraz, ki
se mu povsem prileže, tedaj je simbol že MRTEV in ima samo še zgodovinsko vrednost.
Živ simbol je torej tisti simbol, ki je za opazovalca najvišji izraz tega, kar ta sluti, vendar je njegov
kon ni pomen in zato »ime« še neznan. Simbol torej prisiljuje nezavedno, da SODELUJE; on torej
ustvarja življenje in potiska dalje njegov razvoj.82 S tem v zvezi odli no pripoveduje R. de Becker83:
»Simbol lahko primerjamo s kristalom, ki razli no prepuš a son no svetlobo, kar zavisi od plokev na
katere pada.Tudi bi lahko rekli, da je simbol živo bitje, tisti koš ek v gibanju in v spremembah. In prav
s tem, ko se vanj poglabljamo, prodiramo vase po tisti poti, po kateri smo jeli kreniti in razumemo
smer tega gibanja, ki je naše bitje podvzelo.«
Z Mirceo Eliade naj ob tem dodam: simbol je »transcendentna kategorija višine, nadzemskega,
neskon nega, ki se odkriva celemu loveku (razumu in duši)«; je tista neposredna misel popolne
zavesti loveka, ki se odkriva kot tak, cel. V njej lovek postaja svesten svojega položaja v svetu v tisti
enovitosti, kjer se njegova drama življenja v istem kaže tudi kot organska povezava s tistim, kar
najgloblje dolo a njegovo podzavest in njene najplemenitejše izraze duhovnega.84
Na koncu naj pribijem, da simbol prestopa meje povsem racionalnega, vendar pri tem ne zapada v
absurdnost. Vendar, njegova logika ni logi na, ampak analogna.
Prednost simbola (voda, strela, ogenj...) je v tem sa osredinja vse sile, ki evocirajo to sliko in vsem
njenim analogijam, na vseh ravneh kozmosa in zavesti. Tako naprimer: vodni ali lunarni simbol sta
veljavna na vseh ravneh bivanja; njuno vrednost simultano odkrivamo. Simboli se zato na nek na in
tudi medsebojno prekrivajo - kar se izraža v njihovi bitni afiniteti, kakor jo poimenuje Jung.
Simbolni svet je nadalje ve dimenzionalen; - je zvezen, kot so na primer zveze:
zemlja-nebo, prostor- as, imanentno-transcendentno...
- Je lahko tudi nasproten – tedaj, ko ima no no in dnevno podobo.
Nastopa lahko kot del-za celoto itd.
Ve dimenzionalni simboli imajo lahko neskon no število dimenzij, razsežij.
Simbol je vezan za kulturo, kajti vedno pomeni nekaj, okrog esa se dolo ena skupnost identificira.
Zato tisto, kar je najsvetejši simbol za ene pomeni navaden znak za druge... Vezan je namre s tako
zvanim bivanjskim spremstvom.
Vse simbolno se torej giblje proti danemu središ u, ki še nikjer nima krožnice. S tem v zvezi naj
omenim tudi razvrstitev simbolov v njihovi organski razvrš enosti v naši zavesti.Izhodiš a razvrstitve
82
Primerjaj C. G. Jung, Psihološki tipi, Ženeva 1951, str. 429-494 (fr. izd.).
Les machinachtion de la nuit, Paris 1961, str. 289.
84
Cit. delo, str. 47.
83
34
so pri razli nih znanstvenikih seveda razli na. G. Durand govori o redih simbolov, kakor jih vidi v
osnovnih antropoloških strukturah. Simboli se tako konvergentno in divergentno stekajo v skupine in
se pojavljajo kot gibala shem, ki usklajajo nagone in reflekse subjekta s tem, kar zahteva okolje. Isti
razlikuje tudi tako imenovani dnevni in no ni tok simbolov.85
Simboli so tisto dinami no jedro, ki je zna ilno, da okrog sebe napleta pripoved, ki je zna ilna
pripoved mita.V taki povezavi z nastankom mitov pa A. H. Knappe razlikuje: nebesne simbole (nebo,
sonce, luna, zvezde...) in zemeljske simbole (vode, vulkani, gore...). M. Eliade pa govori86 o uranskih
simbolih (nebesna bitja, bogovi nevihte, kulti sonca, lunarna mistika, vodne epifanije...). Tem se v
veliki skupini kozmobiološkega gibanja v solidarnosti pridružujejo še simboli prostora in asa – v
dinamiki ve nega kroženja.87
5. Simboli ni dinamizem in njegova široka dejavnost v posameznikovem življenju in družbi88
Morda bo kdo dejal: Ali še ni konca simbolnih posebnosti in prvin njihovega delovanja?
Še ne!
e zelo na kratko povzamem najvažnejše funkcije simbolov v življenju posameznika in družbe, potem
moram omeniti kar osem velikih zakonitosti simbolne dinamike. Tu jo seveda reduciram na
osrednje, vendar jo moram omeniti, da bi pomembnost simbolnega v besedilih Psalmov, ki jih
moramo imeti nerpestano pred o mi, vedno sproti zagledali in uvidevali.
Omeniti torej moram
5. 1. Osem temeljnih zakonitosti simbolne dinamike
Te temeljne zakonitosti bom podal samo okvirno in kar se da enostavno. Na tem mestu nam gre le za
to, da se zavemo pomembnosti simbolov znotraj loveške komunikacije, zavesti in besedil.
5. 1. 1. Simbol v dinamiki odkrivanja
lovek, ki je (kot bitje) vržen v prostor- as, bi bil povsem izgubljen brez simbolne dinamike, ki iš e in
odkriva rešitev iz tega, kar je znano in se giblje v ono stran, nedosežnega in neznanega. »Ko naš duh
želi raziskati simbol, tedaj ga privle ejo tiste ideje (slike, podobe), ki so na oni strani tega, kar je
povsem raz-um-ljivo«. Ker je tega, kar je povsem razumljivo vedno malo, onega – še nerazumljenega
– pa vedno ve , je torej ta zna ilna simbolna dinamika odkrivanja izjemne važnosti. To si moramo
nekoliko približati s primerom: to kar je krožno, okroglo, nekako kli e na pomo sonce, spet to pa
nadalje tisto, kar je božansko. Vendar se to, slednje v našem iskanju vedno znova simbolno izmika.
Nastala je torej simbolna povezava med okroglim, soncem in božanskim! Vendar se, kljub temu,
strinjamo z Jungom, da je »odbrani simbol najboljša možna oznaka ali formula za tisto, kar še vedno
ostaja relativno ne-spoznatno, ki obstaja ali bi moglo obstajati«.89 Okroglo samo po sebi ni božansko
in prav tako tudi ne sonce. Vidimo torej, da nam simbol omogo a svobodno gibanje skozi vse plasti
stvarnosti, kjer predstavlja samo vršiko našega razuma, vendar bi ta povsem otopela, e bi bila zgolj
racionalna in dokon na (bi lahko pojasnili z Mirceom Eliade). Zna ilno simbolno gibanje od
okroglega do božanskega je torej dinami na realnost našega uma in duha.
5. 2. S to, prvo vlogo, je povezana druga - vloga dinami ne zamenjave
Tisto »neznano« in »nespoznatno« v simbolu nikakor ni puš avska praznina, ampak nedolo enost
zaslutenega. Tisto, kar je treba nadoknaditi, je simbol; njegova vloga je vloga zamenljivke. Naša
zavest ima namre vse polno (auto)cenzur mimo katerih dolo ene vsebine brez simbolnega nikoli ne
bi mogle prodreti. Zato, na nek na in, lovek svoj mikrokozmos gleda s pomo jo kozmološkega
izkustva. Tu smo torej tr ili na eno osnovnih vlog simbola: lovekovo odkrivanje samemu sebi!
Simbolna zamenjava daje razumeti tudi tretjo fukcijo simbola – njegovo posredniško vlogo.
85
Prim njegovo delo Antropološke strukture imaginarnega na straneh 24-50, v francoski izdaji iz leta 1963.
Prim njegovo delo Razprava o zgodovini religij.
87
Nekoliko druga e pa jih spet razvrš a že omenjeni Gaston Bachelard; simboli so tukaj razporejeni v skladu s
štirimi grškimi elementi: zemlja, voda zrak, ogenj, ki mu pomenijo »hormone imaginacije«. Vendar to seveda
niso vse razporeditve simbolov.
88
Prim. francoski uvod v Dictionnaire des symboles (Jean Chevalier), str. I-XXVII.
89
Fr. izdaja Psihološki tipi, Ženeva 1950, str. 20-21; 491.
86
35
5. 3. Posredniška vloga simbolov
Vedno znova se moramo vra ati v lovekov položaj v bivanju. Ta je – osnovno gledano, neznosen.
lovek zlahka opazi te oddaljenosti, razdalje med seboj in spoznanim in spoznatnim »drugim«.
Vendar - ne more in ne zna jih premoš ati. Da bi bilo to premoš anje možno, igrajo simboli
posredniško vlogo (znotraj sicer ujetega duha). Simbol je tu graditelj mostov in na novo združuje to,
kar se je razklalo in povezuje nepovezljivo. Nebo in zemljo, snov in duha, naravo in kulturo, stvarnost
in sanje, nezavedno in zavedno in ozaveš eno. Kakšna povezava! Ali e druga e povem:
Cintrifugalnim silam instinktivne psihike, ki bi nas raznesle v morje kapljic ustev in prividov, simbol
protistavi centripetalno silo, kjer v mnoštvu naziramo enovitost in pridemo do enovitega. Tako
naprimer stukture libida, ki (same po sebi) razdvajajo, nadomeš a s strukturami združevanja
usmerjenega libida in tako ustvarja ravnotežje v nas.
Živa igra simbolov tako v psihi nem življenju posameznika omogo a in pospešuje zdravo in
intenzivno stabilno psihi no dejavnost, ki obenem osvobaja. Seveda je vedno potreben prehod v obe
smeri zavesti in ravno tu simbol igra svojo posredniško »prehodno« vlogo.
Verjetno si zlepa niste mislili kaj vse v nas samih je odvisno od tega- simbolnega.
In nadalje:
5. 4. Vloga poenotenja
Simbolna funkcija poenotenja je dokaj razumljiva, saj zelo hitro razumemo, da je treba vsako
razpršenost naše zavesti, ki je nujna, nekako poenotiti. Temeljni simboli namre zaobjemajo vsakdanje
lovekovo izkustvo, pa naj gre za versko, kozmi no, družbeno ali psihi no izkustvo. Ali naj gre tudi za
to, kar je nezavedno, zavestno ali nad-zavestno, ali zemeljsko, nadzemeljsko ali nebeško – ali tudi
plaze e, hode e, lete e... To je ta razpršenost v naši zavesti. Da ne bi ostajali v tej konfuziji, ki bi bila
povsem brezizhodna, ustvarja simbol (s svojo zna ilno) mrežo dovolj trdno vez med razli nim,
razpršenim in nespojljivim in tako loveka naredi za »gospodarja« sveta - namesto tujca v lastnem
svetu.90 Pierre Emanuel s tem v zvezi pravi, da je simbolno »neprestana osmoza med notranjim in
90
PA smo res vedno gospodarji in nikoli tujci? Poznate slovito dramo francoskega dramatika, esejista A.
Camusa, Tujec? Se velja zamisliti! Pisca poznate po njegovem zna ilnem »absurdizmu«, ki je bil še v mojih
mladih letih nekoliko moderen celo pri nas. O njem v W. Enc. Beremo:
Albert Camus (November 7, 1913 – January 4, 1960) - was a French author and philosopher and one of the principal
luminaries (with Jean-Paul Sartre) of existentialism. Camus was the second youngest-ever recipient of the Nobel Prize for
Literature (after Rudyard Kipling) when he received the award in 1957. He is also the shortest-lived of any literature laureate
to date. He was born in Mondovi, Algeria to a French Algerian (pied noir) settler family. His mother was of Spanish
extraction. His father, Lucien, died in the Battle of the Marne in 1914 during the First World War, while serving as a member
of the Zouave infantry regiment. Camus lived in poor conditions during his childhood in the Belcourt section of Algiers.
In 1923, Camus was accepted into the lycée and eventually to the University of Algiers. However, he contracted tuberculosis
in 1930, which put an end to his football activities (he had been a goalkeeper for the university team) and forced him to make
his studies a part-time pursuit. He took odd jobs including private tutor, car parts clerk, and work for the Meteorological
Institute. He completed his licence de philosophie (BA) in 1935; in May of 1936, he successfully presented his thesis on
Plotinus, Néo-Platonisme et Pensée Chrétienne for his diplôme d'études supérieures (roughly equivalent to an M.A. by
thesis).
Camus joined the French Communist Party in 1934, apparently for concern over the political situation in Spain (which
eventually resulted in the Spanish Civil War) rather than support for Marxist-Leninist doctrine. In 1936, the independenceminded Algerian Communist Party (PCA) was founded. Camus joined the activities of Le Parti du Peuple Algérien, which
got him into trouble with his communist party comrades. As a result, he was denounced as "Trotskyite", which did not endear
him to Stalinist communism.
In 1934, he married Simone Hie, a morphine addict, but the marriage ended due to Simone's infidelity. In 1935, he founded
Théâtre du Travail — "Worker's Theatre" — (renamed Théâtre de l'Equipe in 1937), which survived until 1939. From 1937
to 1939, he wrote for a socialist paper, Alger-Republicain, and his work included an account of the Arabs who lived in
Kabyles in poor conditions, which apparently cost him his job. From 1939 to 1940, he briefly wrote for a similar paper, SoirRepublicain. He was rejected from the French army because of his tuberculosis.
In 1940, Camus married Francine Faure and he began to work for Paris-Soir magazine. In the first stage of World War II, the
so-called Phony War stage, Camus was a pacifist. However, he was in Paris to witness how the Wehrmacht took over. On
December 19, 1941, Camus witnessed the execution of Gabriel Peri, an event which Camus later said crystallized his revolt
against the Germans. Afterwards he moved to Bordeaux alongside the rest of the staff of Paris-Soir. In this year he finished
his first books, The Stranger and The Myth of Sisyphus. He returned briefly to Oran, Algeria in 1942.
Literary career
During the war Camus joined the French Resistance cell Combat, which published an underground newspaper of the same
name. This group worked against the Nazis, and in it Camus assumed the moniker "Beauchard". Camus became the paper's
36
zunanjim« svetom. Vendar, e dobro premislim: kaj je zunanje in kaj notranje? In takoj smo ujeti v
zanke idealisti nih filozofij... Vendar, moram naprej, k simbolnemu.
5. 5. Terapevtska in vgojna vloga simbolov
editor in 1943, and when the Allies liberated Paris Camus reported on the last of the fighting. He eventually resigned from
Combat in 1947, when it became a commercial paper. It was here that he became acquainted with Jean-Paul Sartre.
After the war, Camus became one member of Sartre's entourage and frequented Café de Flore on the Boulevard St. Germain
in Paris. Camus also toured the United States to lecture about French existentialism. Although he leaned left politically, his
strong criticisms of communist doctrine did not win him any friends in the communist parties and eventually also alienated
Sartre.
In 1949 his tuberculosis returned and he lived in seclusion for two years. In 1951 he published The Rebel, a philosophical
analysis of rebellion and revolution which made clear his rejection of communism. The book upset many of his colleagues
and contemporaries in France and led to the final split with Sartre. The dour reception depressed him and he began instead to
translate plays.
Camus's most significant contribution to philosophy was his idea of the absurd, the result of our desire for clarity and
meaning within a world and condition that offers neither, which he explained in The Myth of Sisyphus and incorporated into
many of his other works, such as The Plague. Some would argue that Camus is better described not as an existentialist (a
label he would have rejected) but as an absurdist.
In the 1950s Camus devoted his effort to human rights. In 1952 he resigned from his work for UNESCO when the UN
accepted Spain as a member under the leadership of General Franco. In 1953 he was one of the few leftists who criticized
Soviet methods to crush a worker's strike in East Berlin. In 1956 he protested similar methods in Hungary.
He maintained his pacifism and resistance to capital punishment everywhere in the world. One of his most significant
contributions was an essay collaboration with Koestler, the writer, intellectual, and founder of the League Against Capital
Punishment.
When the Algerian War of Independence began in 1954 it presented a moral dilemma for Camus. He identified with piednoirs, and defended the French government on the grounds that revolt of its North African colony was really an integral part
of the a 'new Arab imperialism' led by Egypt and an 'anti-Western' offensive orchestrated by Russia to 'encircle Europe' and
'isolate the United States' (Actuelles III: Chroniques Algeriennes, 1939-1958). Although favouring greater Algerian
autonomy or even federation, though not full-scale independence, he believed that the pied-noirs and Arabs could co-exist.
During the war he advocated civil truce that would spare the civilians, which was rejected by both sides who regarded it as
foolish. Behind the scenes, he began to work clandestinely for imprisoned Algerians who faced the death penalty.
From 1955 to 1956 Camus wrote for L'Express. In 1957 he was awarded the Nobel Prize in literature, officially not for his
novel The Fall, published the previous year, but for his writings against capital punishment in the essay "Réflexions Sur la
Guillotine". When he spoke to students at the University of Stockholm, he defended his apparent inactivity in the Algerian
question and stated that he was worried what could happen to his mother who still lived in Algeria. Apparently French leftwing intellectuals used this as another pretext to ostracize him.
Albert Camus' gravestoneCamus died on January 4, 1960 in a car accident near Sens, in a place named "Le Grand Frossard".
Ironically, Camus had uttered a remark earlier in his life that the most absurd way to die would be in a car accident. The
driver of the Facel Vega, Michel Gallimard -- his publisher and close friend -- also perished in the accident. Camus was
interred in the Lourmarin Cemetery, Lourmarin, Vaucluse, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, France. He was survived by his twin
children, Catherine and Jean, who hold the copyrights to his work.
Summary of Absurdism
Camus particularly is considered the originator of absurdism, a philosophy related to Existentialism. Absurdism contends that
human beings are basically irrational and human suffering is the result of vain attempts by individuals to find reason or
meaning in the absurd abyss of existence.
In The Myth of Sisyphus, Camus claims that the only true philosophical question is that of suicide. That is, faced with
suffering and the absence of meaning, should we bother living at all or simply kill ourselves? Camus argues that, historically,
most people have either believed that life is meaningless and concluded in favor of suicide, or have created some "artificial"
meaning, like religion, to fill their lives. Camus claims that there is a third option: we can realize that life is meaningless and
nevertheless keep living. People who opt for this third option are "absurd heroes". The story of Sisyphus, taken from Greek
mythology, epitomises Camus's concept of the absurd hero. Sisyphus was condemned to push a boulder up a mountain for
eternity. His heroism lies in his commitment to his task, while remaining fully aware that he can never complete it. In spite of
the absurdity of his existence, Sisyphus refuses the lure of suicide, and accepts the world as it is. For Camus, suicide cannot
be a true escape from the absurdity of existence. We as individuals have the responsibility to confront or embrace that
absurdity head on.
The Rebel, the Don Juan, and the Artist are three figures that Camus identifies as absurd heroes. Each of these people finds
meaning in his or her own pursuits (often in the face of social or political repression) and thus lives up to the example of
Sisyphus.
His famous works:
The Stranger (L'Étranger, also translated as The Outsider) (1942)
The Plague (La Peste) (1947)
The Fall (La Chute) (1956)
A Happy Death (La Mort heureuse) (early version of The Stranger, published posthumously 1970)
The First Man (Le premier homme) (incomplete, published posthumously 1995)
37
Prihajamo do naslednje izjemne vloge simbolnosti, ki je njena vzgojna in celo terapevtska vloga. Moj
profesor na Lateranu (Sante Babolin, tudi profesor na Gregoriani v Rimu; pisec številnih razprav s
podro ja semantike in simbolike), mi je, po enem izmed opravljenih izpitov podaril svojo odli no
knjigo Icona e la conoscenza, kjer v posebnem delu in analizi simbolnih tipov vzhodne ikonografije
(vzhodnih ikon) razpravlja o tako imenovanem terapevtskm u inku ikon, ki je posledica delovanja
simbolnih arhetipskih prvin, upodobljenih na ikonah. Simbol hrani in vzbuja vse to, kar je v loveku
povezano z nežnostjo, psihi no inteligenco (znanjem) in gotovostjo. Seveda, simbolno ni samo tu in v
taki meri in tako delujo e! Vsak simbol hrani to energijo (kozorog, zvezda, žitno zrno). Vendar imajo
iz iš ene tehnike slikanja ikon še posebno delovanje prav zaradi silne natan nosti posnemanja teh
arhetipskih prvim. V tem smislu ikone zdravijo – na simbolni ravni. Zdravljenje torej.
Druga skrajnost, ki naj jo tu opišem, pa bi bil seveda svet brez simbolov, ki bi dejansko pomenilo
smrt psihi nega in zato smrt loveka kot bitja. Tudi tega se premalo zavedamo. O tem tudi
premalokrat premišljamo, ko interpretiramo ta ali oni tekst, besedilo. Prisotnost simbolnega znotraj
besedil je torej prisotnost, ki ji gre druga na obravnava.
Seveda je terapevtska in vzgojna vloga simbola tudi taka, da ji je treba »ponuditi svojo polovico«, da
bi dosegli celoto. V tem smislu vam vsem znani nemški pesnik Rainer Maria Rilke91 pomenljivo
poje:
91
Rainer Maria Rilke ( 1875 – 1926) is generally considered the German language's greatest 20th century poet.
Though he never found a consistent verse form, his haunting images tend to focus on the problems of
Christianity in an age of disbelief, solitude, and profound anxiety. He is generally placed in the camp of
Modernist poets, though his religious dilemmas may set him apart from some of his peers.
He wrote in both verse and in a highly lyrical prose. His two most famous verse pieces are the Sonnets to
Orpheus and the Duino Elegies; his two most famous prose pieces are the Letters to a Young Poet and the semiautobiographical Notebooks of Malte Laurids Brigge.The parents pressured the poetically and artistically gifted
youth into attending a military academy from 1886, but he left it due to illness in 1891. From 1892 to 1895 he
had private lessons to prepare him for the university entry exam, which he passed in 1895. In 1895 and 1896 he
studied literature, history of art and philosophy in Prague and Munich. Once he had left Prague Rilke changed
his first name from "René" to Rainer, perhaps indicating his discontent with his family.
He chose his own epitaph:
Rose, oh reiner Widerspruch, Lust,
Niemandes Schlaf zu sein unter soviel
Lidern.
(Rose, oh pure contradiction, joy
of being No-one's sleep, under so
many lids.)
1875-1896
He was born as René Karl Wilhelm Johann Josef Maria Rilke in Prague, Austria-Hungary, on 4 December 1875. His childhood and youth in
Prague were not very happy. His father, Josef Rilke (1838-1906), became a railway official after an unsuccessful military career. His mother,
Sophie ("Phia") Entz (1851-1931), came from a well-to-do Prague manufacturing family (originally Jewish but later converted to Christianity
to escape antisemitism). The parents' marriage fell apart in 1884. The relationship between the mother and her only son was encumbered
because the mother had not got over the early death of her elder daughter and forced René (French: "The Reborn") into her role and tied him
to her out of emotional helplessness. His mother forced him to dress in girl's clothing when he was young, and generally fill the place of his
lost sister.
1897-1902
In 1897 in Munich Rainer Maria Rilke met and fell in love with the widely traveled intellectual and lady of letters Lou Andreas-Salome
(1861-1937). The ensuing intensive relationship with the married woman lasted until 1899. But even after their separation Lou AndreasSalomé continued to be Rilke's most important confidant until the end of his life. Because she had trained from 1912 to 1913 as a
psychoanalyst with Sigmund Freud she was able to impart knowledge of psychoanalysis to Rilke.
In 1898 Rilke undertook a journey lasting several weeks to Italy. In both following years he visited Russia. In 1899 he travelled to Moscow,
where he met Leo Tolstoy. Between May and August of 1900 a second journey to Russia accompanied only by Lou Andreas-Salomé again
took him to Moscow and St. Petersburg.
In autumn 1900 Rilke stayed in Worpswede where he got to know the sculptress Clara Westhoff (1878-1954), whom he married in the
following spring. Their daughter Ruth (1901-1972) was born in December 1901. However, as soon as summer 1902 Rilke left home and
travelled to Paris in order to write a monograph of the sculptor Auguste Rodin (1840-1917). The relationship between Rilke and Clara
Westhoff continued for the rest of his life but he was not one for a middle-class family life. Besides which he had financial worries which
could only be alleviated by drudging commissioned work.
1902-1910
At first the time in Paris was difficult because the foreign metropolis had many hidden terrors. Rilke later called on these experiences in the
first part of his only novel, The Notebooks of Malte Laurids Brigge. At the same time his encounter with modernism was very stimulating:
Rilke got deeply involved in the sculptures of Auguste Rodin and then with the work of the painter Paul Cezanne (1839-1906). During these
years Paris increasingly became the writer's main residence.
38
e želiš, da drevo živi
obkroži ga z notranjosti prostorom,
ki v tebi biva.
- Ko se tako rojeva,
da se zmanjšaš ti,
zares postajaš ti – drevo.92
Mislim, da ste Rilkejevo pesem raz-um-eli in dojeli to, kar želim povedati.
V našem ( loveškem) svetu brez simbolov, »brez tega odstopljenja enega dela, da dobimo drugega«,
e smem temu tako re i, bi ne mogli duhovno dihati.
Simboli nas postavljajo v ta svet tako, da se utimo z njim enoviti, vendar v tem smislu, da moram
sam postati malo manjši, da bi bilo tu še nekaj prostora za drevo, ki ga gledam. Še ve , le na tej ravni
moremo priti do neke vrste identifikacije, ki nam je potrebna pri dojemanju. Zakaj je to važno, emu
taka identifikacija?Taka identifikacija (in z njo dojemanje) že otroku pomaga, da se lahko identificira
z junaki, kar pomeni, da si more ustvariti znosen odnos do sveta. Moj profesor ( dr. Mario Lanza mi je
dejal: »Otrokom moramo neprestano pripovedovati, da jih vstavljamo v ta svet. Naša vstavitev seveda
ni neznosna, otroku pa omogo a, da se prilagaja svetni »neznosnosti« bivanja. Pripovedovanje
bibli nih besedil pa ima še druge dimenzije.93
Gledanje ( mislim na sveto premišljanje, kontemplacija božjega pred njimi) v ikono94, ki ima
arhetipske poteze, je pravo »branje duhovnosti« (Sante Babolin); je prava izspostavitev svoje
The most important works of the Paris period were Neue Gedichte (New Poems) (1907), Der neuen Gedichte anderer Teil (Another Part of
the New Poems) (1908), the two Requiem poems (1909) and the novel The Notebooks of Malte Laurids Brigge, started in 1904 and
completed in January 1910.
1910-1919
After the appearance of the Notebooks Rilke fell into a creativity crisis that only ended in February 1922 with the completion of the Duinese
Elegies that he had started in 1912. This poem cycle owes its name to Rilke's stay at Countess Marie of Thurn and Taxis's Castle Duino near
Trieste between October 1911 and May 1912.
The outbreak of the First World War surprised Rilke during a stay in Germany. He was unable to return to Paris, where his property was
confiscated and auctioned. He spent the greater part of the war in Munich. From 1914 to 1916 he had a turbulent affair with the painter Lou
Albert-Lasard.
Rilke was called up at the beginning of 1916 and he had to undertake basic training in Vienna. Influential friends interceded on his behalf
and he was transferred to the War Records Office and discharged from the military on 9 June 1916. He spent the subsequent time once again
in Munich, interrupted by a stay on Hertha Koenig's Gut Bockel in Westphalia. The traumatic experience of military service, a reminder of
the horrors of the military academy, almost completely silenced him as a poet.
1919-1926
On 11 June 1919 Rilke travelled from Munich to Switzerland. The exterior motive was an invitation to lecture in Zurich, but the real reason
was the wish to escape the post-war chaos and take up once again his work on the Duinese Elegies. The search for a suitable and affordable
place to live proved to be very difficult. Among other places Rilke lived in Soglio, Locarno and Berg am Irchel. Only in the summer of 1921
was he able to find a permanent residence in the Chateau de Muzot, close to Sierre in Valais. In May 1922 Rilke's patron Werner Reinhart
(1884-1951) purchased the building so that Rilke could live there rent free.
In an intensive creative period Rilke completed the Duinese Elegies within several weeks in February 1922. Before and after he wrote both
parts of the poem cycle The Sonnets to Orpheus. Both are among the highpoints of Rilke's work.
From 1923 Rilke had to struggle increasingly with impaired health that necessitated many long stays in a sanatorium. Even the long stay in
Paris between January and August 1925 was an attempt to escape the illness by means of a change in location and an alteration in his living
conditions. Despite this, numerous important individual poems appeared in the years 1923-26 (including Gong and Mausoleum) beside a
comprehensive and an as yet insufficiently praised lyrical work in French.
Only shortly before his death was Rilke's illness diagnosed as leukaemia. The poet died on 29 December 1926 in the Valmont Sanatorium in
Switzerland, and was laid to rest on 2 January 1927 in the Raron cemetery to the west of Visp.
92
Moj prevod (nem. orig.).
O razsežjih naših pripovedi pri verouku, vzgoji, vrtcu, v šoli... bi moral obširno govoriti posebej. Tukaj te re i
samo omenjam.
94
Ikon ne zamenjuj z nabožnimi slikami ali celo fotografijami. Nabožne slike so simbolno (vsaj ve inoma) brez
vsake vrednosti in so zato pravo kvarjenje okusa in imaginativnih komunikacijskih principov v loveku. Takih
industrijskih podob seveda ne bi smelo biti v naših svetiš ih.
Ikona je podoba, ki je slikana v posebnem motrenju (in tudi po posebni duhovni predpripravi) in je namenjena
posebnemu »gledanju« motrenju, ki predstavlja samo zunanjo oporo duha, v resnici pa sproža proces »nevidnega
za nevidno« »neodslikljivega v božjem) v naši notranjosti. Ta proces, ki je sicer prisoten tudi v simbolnem
znotraj besedil, je izredno dragocen.
Za tiste, ki ste protestantje med mojimi poslušalci pravim, da morajo sami v branju Božje besede tudi priti do
teg globin motrenja (kontemplacije), vendar – brez zunanjih opor, kar je v asih boljše, vedno pa ne. loveško
bitje je namre tudi bitje »notranjih slik« in zato simbolnega motrenja. Tudi med preroki imamo take, ki Božjo
93
39
notranjosti za terapevtsko zdravljenje. Eminentni duhovni pisatelj lepo pravi, da »identifikacija z
biblijskimi bitji pomeni enega najboljših na inov, da odkrijemo svoj najgloblji položaj pred Bogom.«
Gorje, e bi se vedno identificirali samo s Kajnom.In ne bi bilo prav, e bi poznali samo Abela.
Ker so simboli ambivalentni je zlasti važno, posebej za otroke, da jih neprestano izpostavljamo tej
ustvarjalni imaginaciji (prim. uvod v Borisa Afanasijeva, Ruske prepovedane pravljice, ki ga je napisal
znani ruski semantik Boris Andrejevi Uspenskij95)
5. 6. Socializacija in simboli
loveku govore samo živi simboli, tisti torej, ki jih nekako zamejuje njegova kultura. Indijcu, ki ga
omrežujejo simbolni sklopi Ved (svetih indijskih spisov)96, govori sveta krava na popolnoma druga en
na in kot normandijcu. Socializacijo, na kratko re eno, loveku »vsiljujejo« le živi simboli njegove
lastne kulture (razen arhetipskih, ki so tako reko univerzalni). Mrtvi simbol pa je podoben dragoceni
cerkvi, kamor nih e ne prihaja molit.
5. 7. Simboli in simbolna resonanca
Pojav resonance sre ujemo tudi v isto fizi nem svetu. Žica, ki je enako napeta, zazveni ob bližini
druge enako napete žice. Most, ki ima svojo resonan no stopnjo, bi ob »ulovitvi« te stopnje zaradi
oja itve nihanja ne vzdržal vibracij. Tako tudi individualno delujo i simboli reagirajo na tiste »v
kulturni okolici«, tako da se njihova komunikacijska mo pove uje. Gre torej za posebno oja itev
med individualnim in družbenim.
Gledal sem TV oddajo o šiitih. Ogromna množica v silnem protestnem valovanju je bila kakor eden.
Posameznik v tem morju ne pomeni ni – v tem trenutku je sam (vsak posameznik) reakcija skupnosti
in skupnost je njegova reakcija. Vsi se zavedamo te mo i, ki je torej mo simbolnega.
V tem smislu razumemo tudi transcendetno funkcijo simbola, kot jo definira C. G. Jung., ki
»razrešuje, širi vitalne mo i, ki so antagonisti ne in so združljive samo v procesu simbolnega
integrativnega in simultanega razvoja«.97
besedo SLIŠIJO in take, ki »gledajo v no nih videnjih« simbolne podobe (roeh in hozeh). Biblija torej izkazuje
globoko »simbolno prakso«, ki je nih e ne more odpraviti, saj je pisana od ljudi in za ljudi.
95
(Fil E.): Boris Andrejewitsch Uspenski (* 1937 in Moskau) ist, zusammen mit Jurij Lotman, der bedeutendste Vertreter der russischen
Semiotik. Er lehrte lange Jahre an der Moskauer Lomonossow-Universität, hatte Gastprofessuren in Österreich und den USA inne und ist zur
Zeit Professor in Neapel. Uspenskij ist Autor von über 400 Schriften zur theoretischen Linguistik, zur Geschichte der kirchenslawischen und
russischen Sprache, zur Kulturwissenschaft und zur Kunst- und Geschichtssemiotik.
96
Prim delo: Principle Upanishads in uvod v to veliko delo, ki ga je napisal veliki indijski filozof Servapali
Radhakrishnan. V W. Enc. o njem ( na kratko) beremo: »Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (September 5, 1888 – April 17,
1975) is best known as the man who introduced the thinking of western idealist philosophers into Indian thought. He was an
Oxford don who became the first Vice President and the second President of India.
He was born at Tiruttani, forty miles to the north-east of Madras in South India. His mother tongue was Telugu. His early
years were spent in Tiruttani and Tirupati. He graduated with a Master's Degree in Arts from Madras University.
In 1921, he was appointed to the most important philosophy chair in India, King George V Chair of Mental and Moral
Science in the University of Calcutta. Radhakrishnan represented the University of Calcutta at the Congress of the
Universities of the British Empire in June 1926 and the International Congress of Philosophy at the Harvard University in
September 1926. In 1929, Radhakrishnan was invited to take the post vacated by Principal J. Estin Carpenter in Manchester
College, Oxford. This gave him the opportunity to lecture to the students of University of Oxford on Comparative Religion.
He worked as the Vice-Chancellor of Andhra University from 1931 to 1936. In 1936, Radhakrishnan was named the
Spalding Professor of Eastern Religions and Ethics at the University of Oxford, a post which he held until he was named the
first Vice President of India in 1952.
He showed how western philosophers, despite all claims to objectivity, were biased by theological influences from their
wider culture. In one of his major works he also showed that Indian philosophy, once translated into standard academic
jargon, is worthy of being called philosophy by western standards. His main contribution to Indian thought, therefore, is that
he placed it "on the map", thereby earning Indian philosophy a respect that it had not had before. After 1946, his
philosophical career was cut short when his country needed him as ambassador to UNESCO and later to Moscow. He was
later to become the first Vice-President and finally the President (1962-1967) of India. When he became the President of
India in 1962, some of his students and friends requested him to allow them to celebrate his birthday, September 5. He
replied, "Instead of celebrating my birthday, it would be my proud privilege if September 5 is observed as Teacher's Day."
Since then, Teacher's Day is celebrated in India.
He was awarded the Bharat Ratna in 1954. The University of Oxford instituted the Radhakrishnan Chevening Scholarships
and the Radhakrishnan Memorial Award in his memory.”
97
Navedeno delo, (Psihološki tipi) str. 496-498.
40
5. 8. Simboli kot transformator psihi nih mo i
Simboli prepajajo ves lovekov razvoj, delujejo pa tudi kot transformatior vse naše psihi ne energije.
Kaže, kot da se napajojo iz konfuzne in anarhi ne mo i, da bi jo nekako usmeril v uporabno in vodeno
mo za življenje. »Nezavestna energija«, pravi Gerhard Adler, »ki se v obliki nevrotskih simptomov
nikakor ne bi mogla asimilirati, se pretvarja v energijo, ki se v zavestnem obnašanju lahko integrira
prav zaradi svojstvene funkcije simbolov, pa naj bi to izhajalo iz sanj ali simbola samega, mora naš jaz
asimilirati, proces integracije pa je mogo le, e je jaz za to dozorel.« Simbol torej ne le izraža globino
tega jaza (s katerim oblikuje dolo eno obliko ali lik) ampak mnogo ve – z afektivnim nabojem teh
slik vzpodbuja razvoj psihi nih procesov«; on pretvarja energije kot alkemikov atanor.98
Na kratko naj povzamem: Simboli, ki nastopajo znotraj Psalmov, s svojimi zakonitostmi, ki smo jih
našteli in delno celo analizirali, prepre ujejo duševno smrt in smrt kulture. Njihov pomen je torej
ve plasten ne le v strukturah teksta ampak tudi strukturah osebnega in družbenega življenja. Simbolno
pogojuje dojemanje tako, da ga iz vsakega »dojetega« dvigne do nedojemljivega, ne da bi se sam
razpuš al v absurd.
Tako smo, kon no, prišli do tretjega dela našega predavanja – in aka nas isto konkretno: pokazati v
posameznem besedilu psalma na te simbole o katerih govorimo. Pokazati pravim, kajti simbolno
pravzaprav ne razlagamo. Razlaga dejansko simbol potisne navzdol, do znamenja, ki je samo po sebi
vedno zamenljivo in izgine v metaforiziranju in sto hermeneutikah – e dovolite. Jaz torej (bistveno)
samo kažem simbol. Kar je zgolj razlagalnega v tem mojem po etju, prosim, vzemite zgolj kot
background, kot ozadje, kot rno tablo, da se kreda bolje vidi.
III. DEL: NEKAJ ILUSTRACIJ o simbolih v Psalmih
Najve ja zmota v tej kratki ilustracijo prisotnosti simbolov besedilu psalmov bi bila ta, da bi jih hoteli
razložiti in razlagati. Razlaga pravzaprav simbole spravi na raven znamenja. V kolikor se jim skušamo
približati, to pomeni bolj neko formalno kataloško dejavnost. Njihova funkcija je, kot sem dovolj
jasno razlagal doslej, v tem, da ta besedila pojemo, recitiramo... in se tako »izpostavimo« njihovemu
svojskemu vplivu99in globinskemu delovanju. Že na prvi pogled vidimo, da v šestih vrsticah Psalma 1
nastopa ve kot 9 simbolov.
PSALM 1100 (kot ga prevajajo Judje; angl. besedilo)101
2
3
HAPPY IS the man that hath not walked in the counsel of the wicked, nor stood in the way of sinners,
nor sat in the seat of the scornful.
But his delight is in the law of HaShem; and in His law doth he meditate day and night.
And he shall be like a tree102 planted by streams of water103, that bringeth forth its fruit in its season, and
whose leaf doth not wither; and in whatsoever he doeth he shall prosper.
98
Primerjaj Gerhard Adlerjevo delo, Etudes de Psychologie Jungienne, Paris 1951, stran 55.
Najbolje ilustriram te svoje trditve, e spomnim na P. Ricoeurjevo besedilo Dal testo all'azione, Milano 1989.
P. Ricoeur, Il conflitto delle interpretazioni, Milano 1986, zlasti poglavje Ermeneutica dei simboli e riflessione
filozofica I in II in na koncu dela Dal fantasma al simbolo.Glej tudi Adriano Paglietti, Filozofia della parola e
della communicazione, Roma 1991.Mircea Eliade, Immagini e simboli, Milano 1981. Mario Ruggenini, I
fenomeni e le parole (Marietti) 1991.
100
Ps 1 in 2 sta brez naslova, ker veljata kot uvod v psalter. Neko sta sestavljala en sam psalm, ki se za enja in
kon uje z blagrovanjem. Ps 1 je izrek modrostnega tipa in postavlja v nasprotje sre o pravi nega in krivi nega
loveka. Po osnovni antiteti ni zgradbi in po simboliki je zelo podoben izreku v Jer 17,5–8.
Vrsta 2 - premišljuje ali mrmra; v Izraelu so postavo premišljevali in jo brali na glas ali polglasno.
99
101
Zakaj vnašam prevod v angleš ino? Samo zato, da se vidi razlika med razli nimi ang. prevodi in tem, kar iz
hebrejskega jezika v živ angl. jezik prevedejo Judje.
41
4
5
6
Not so the wicked; but they are like the chaff which the wind104 driveth away.
Therefore the wicked shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.
For HaShem regardeth the way of the righteous; but the way of the wicked shall perish.
Hebrejski (vokaliziran) original:
#
!"
-+'
! ' *)'( &)
$% &'(
+
, )* / * *'( #*!.% , *" 3 )- 12( 0 - -- ,
+% ! 7 6, # *"- ( ,
--*
4 "5
4 *2
+%( (9.:40 8-- - 3
5
6+ <:! & " $%, #=2 8"-()<
;5
-+&' 4
&, # <:! : , &*- Slovenski standardni prevod
1 Blagor loveku,
ki ne hodi na posvet krivi nikov105,
102
Trees - represent prominent men. (Grass - represents masses of mankind.)"The first angel sounded...and the
third part of the trees [prominent men] was burnt up [were converted], and all green grass [men sufficiently alive
to receive or absorb the water of truth] was burnt up [were converted]." Revelation 8:7
Trees represent prominent leaders that stand above the grass, the masses of mankind. The righteous man is
likened to a tree: "And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water..." Psalms 1:3 The wicked are
likened to the "green bay tree." Psalms 37:35
103
Water - represents truth. NT:"Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify and
CLEANSE it with the WASHING of WATER by the word." Ephesians 5:25,26";Whosoever drinks of the water
that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing
up into everlasting life." John 4:14
104
Wind - Blowing winds represent wars. The worst winds of Revelation 7:1 [violence, anarchy] will not reach
their fullest culmination until the true Church is removed from the earth into heavenly glory.
When the world recognizes its helplessness in this greatest time of trouble [when God pours upon them His
indignation, His fierce anger, for their flagrant disobedience and dishonor to Him, their Creator], THEN He will
bless and restore all the repentant and reformed world, and bless them abundantly.
Four winds - represent all parts of the nominal church. From whence are God's elect gathered? God's elect
Church are gathered from every direction, from every quarter of the "field." "And he shall send his angels
[messengers, the Reapers] with a great...trumpet [the truth], and they shall gather together [spiritually to the
harvest truth and oneness with Christ] his elect [saints] from the four winds [from every denomination or quarter
of the wheat field], from one end of heaven [nominal church] to the other." Matthew 24:31
105
Ta prevod mi ni isto ni vše , saj zavaja. Gre namre za ZBOR ali shod, ki je sklican kot posvet. Iz tega
na ina prevoda pa to navadnemu bralcu ni razumljivo.
Gre za .
!"
. Krivi niki namre greše predvsem proti Bogu (ne le proti loveku, ki je tudi sam
krivi en in ga zato Bog opravi uje); še ve , ta »Gospodov duh prežema ves svet«, zato se njihova krivi nost
povsod odtiskuje. On namre »povezuje vse stvarstvo in ujame vsak glas«. »Zato se »nih e, ki izre e krivi no
besedo, ne bo mogel skriti in kaznovalna pravi nost ga ne bo presko ila«. »Pretkano umovanje« prisotno v tem
42
ne stopa na pot grešnikov
in ne seda na klop porogljivcev,
2 temve se veseli v GOSPODOVI postavi
in premišljuje njegovo postavo podnevi in pono i.
3 Tak je kakor drevo,
zasajeno ob potokih voda,
ki daje svoj sad ob svojem asu
in njegovo listje ne ovene;
vse, kar dela, uspeva.
4 S krivi niki ni tako,
temve so kakor pleve,
ki jih veter raznaša.
5 Zato krivi ni ne bodo obstali ob sodbi,
ne grešniki v zboru pravi nih.
6 Zakaj GOSPOD pozna pot pravi nih,
pot krivi nih pa vodi v pogubo.
Splošne opombe
Psalm je nedvomno med mlajšimi, e že ne najmlajšimi tovrstnimi plastmi. Na nek na in
namre povzema celotno Postavo in je kot uvod (skupaj s Ps 2) v celoten Psalterij. Slikanje je
nekako rno-belo. To, kar vsebino povezuje je simbol poti - pot pravi nih in pa tista pot, ki
bo pogubna za grešnega. Ves as se ponavlja glagol hoditi, ustavljati se, sesti, posedati...
Simbol poti nakazuje preobrazbo, duhovno-telesno, celostno preobrazbo. To je pot resnice in
miru, kamor vodi pot na sredini vsega. Je pot in potovanje, ki dosega nebo; tovrstna simbolika
je v vseh kulturah in mitih narodov zelo bogata. Pot in potovanje je navadno na eni strani kot
napor- dvigovanja, na drugi kot spust-po itek. »Vspon na goro Karmel« Janeza od Križa –
seveda ozna uje misti no izkustvo.
Ta je v veselju, ki ga daje Jahve, veselju, ki ga spremlja na tej poti. Pot pa je v tem,
pozitivnem primeru seveda v tem, da verni »premišljuje Postavo no in dan«; je ve no
spremljanje Božjega glasu... in prisluh temu glasu. Postava tu ne pomeni »10 zapovedi«,
ampak vse Božje razodevanje od silnega razodevanja na Sveti gori (2Mz 20, 1-17), v
grmenju, ognju, velikih znamenjih in udežih...
Postava je dejansko pravi nikov drugi jaz. Molivec je torej pravo zlivanje s to skrivnostjo...
Takemu loveku POTI velja estitka: »Sre en si«, ali Blagor ti (makarioi hoi...) - blaženi,
sre ni... Sre ni, ki hodiš po pravi poti, v Bogu! (Primerjaj tudi podobo pravi nega, kakor jo
kaže devteronomi na grška Knjiga modrosti (3. in 4. poglavje).
Drugi simbol je simbol drevesa, ki je zasajeno ob potokih voda... (simbol poznamo že iz
Jeremija, 17, 8. Kakor drevo potrebuje vodo ( arhetipski simbol) tako lovek potrebuje Boga.
Krivi nih, grešnik, je nasprotje od pravi nega, neopore nega (brez graje).
»Vse, kar dela, vse mu uspeva«, tu se naša loveška presoja kosi z izkustvom, kajti - mi bi
dejali, da krivi ni v asih še bolj uspevajo – vendar, psalmist ne misli na zunanji in
kratkotrajen uspeh, ampak na to, kar obstane, kar ima veljavo pred Bogom. dejanska podoba
krivi nega je podoba »pleve, ki jih veter raznaša«. Tak zunanji bliš in zunanja sre a je
povsem brez vrednosti.
»zboru krivi nikov«, »namre lo uje od Boga in preskušanje njegove mo i se neumnim maš uje«. To so bibli ni
odmevi tega »zbora krivi nikov« (prim. Mdr 1, 1-8, delno).
43
»Gospod pozna pot pravi nega« - se ozira na to pot, to je ga ljubi. Bdi nad potjo... v
hebrejskem duhu »se ozira«. Vse drugo vodi v pogubnost (pogubo) »bo izgubljeno«.
V pravem hebrejskem duhu je pot Boga Bog sam, zato pravi nih »hodi po njem«. V tem
istem duhu pravi Kristus: »Jaz sem Pot, Resnica in Življenje« - same simbole torej naniza, da
bi »bili v njem«.
***Globoka problematika simbolov dobrega in hudega v judovski in krš anski literaturi odseva tudi iz odli nega
in sodobnega dela, ki ga je napisal Henning Reventlow, The problem of evil and its symbols in Jewish and
Christian tradition, New York 2004 (ISBN 08244622227).
V tem predavanju uporabljam Hebrew-English Psalter in The Interlineary Hebrew and
English Psalter,106 z opombami, da bi bile te sicer skromne, vendar strokovne in v popolnem
soglasju z originalnim hebrejskim besedilom, hkrati pa, da bi imel ve prostora za to kar
želim dopovedati: dinamizen simbolov znotraj besedila.
II. Od sedmerih spokornih psalmov107 si bomo ogledali le Psalm 6
Hebrejski vokaliziran original
:,< .
+&,& *)A) # >)@ *
>1>"%?>)
+ >B
)%"- , # >%6* 2 ",
+ )! ( '> --- , >. 3 >C- ); - , >9%
+ )-& , E4 ,D , #& ) '> .>,
+ :G%5) > * # .> !F% , '(
+ F- &* ) * " # 6A ,8"5 + G) 7
)&" # $)
- 6' %7 -- %>" 4 1
+ *!- 6" <
# > G -)
+ 6" *< , ) - - 35
,C 2- - 98)((G
+%H F.4 , # 9%4 , )
+ 1 ( ' ('; # ' - ---& )( ",( '
Judovski prevod v angleški jezik:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
106
107
For the Leader; with string-music; on the Sheminith (godalo v oktavi). A Psalm of David.
O HaShem, rebuke me not in Thine anger, neither chasten me in Thy wrath.
Be gracious unto me, O HaShem, for I languish away; heal me, O HaShem, for my bones are affrighted.
My soul also is sore affrighted; and Thou, O HaShem, how long?
Return, O HaShem, deliver my soul; save me for Thy mercy's sake.
For in death there is no remembrance of Thee; in the nether-world who will give Thee thanks?
Michigan (Zonderwan editions) 1980.
To je krš ansko poimenovanje.
8
9
10
44
I am weary with my groaning; every night make I my bed to swim; I melt away my couch with my
tears.
Mine eye108 is dimmed because of vexation; it waxeth old because of all mine adversaries.
Depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity; for HaShem hath heard the voice of my weeping.
HaShem hath heard my supplication; HaShem receiveth my prayer.
11
All mine enemies shall be ashamed and sore affrighted; they shall turn back, they shall be ashamed
suddenly.
Slovenski standardni prevod:
1 Zborovodju,
na godala v oktavi. Davidov psalm.
v svojem gnevu me ne grajaj,
v svoji srditosti me ne karaj!
3 Izkaži mi milost, GOSPOD, ker sem onemogel,
ozdravi me, GOSPOD, ker so moje kosti potrte.
4 Tudi moja duša je silno potrta;
a ti, GOSPOD, doklej?
2 GOSPOD,
5 Vrni se, GOSPOD, reši moje življenje,
odreši me zaradi svoje dobrote!
6 Zakaj v smrti ni spomina nate,
kdo se ti zahvaljuje v podzemlju?
7 Utrujen
sem od vzdihovanja,
vsako no oblivam svojo posteljo,
s solzami mo im svoje ležiš e.
8 Moje oko je otopelo od žalosti,
postaralo se je med vsemi mojimi nasprotniki.
9 Pojdite pro izpred mene vsi, ki delate krivico,
kajti GOSPOD je uslišal glas mojega ihtenja.
10 GOSPOD je uslišal mojo prošnjo,
GOSPOD je sprejel mojo molitev.
11 Osramo eni bodo, zelo bodo zmedeni vsi moji sovražniki,
obrnili se bodo, mahoma bodo osramo eni.
Jeza in srd, ki sta pesniško položena v Gospoda in v globokem doživljanju pesnika povesta,
da je sedaj bolni storil greh; greh in bolezen sta vzrok žalosti, ki jo pretaka v svojo
žalostinko109. Ta je hkrati literarna vrsta njegove pripovedi. Pismo je polno pri evanj o tej
»Božji jezi« ( Ps 90, 7; Job 17, 1; Jer 10, 10; Job 9, 5). Tu moramo razumeti tudi zna ilno
starozavezno povezavo krivda-bolezen
Pesnik uti globoke spremembe v sebi in na sebi... vse okrog je pono i umirjeno, tiho, zato te
grozne spremembe v njem samem še bolj vpijejo...
108
Eye - represents wisdom, understanding, comprehension. Moses told the children of Israel, "Stand still and
SEE the salvation of the Lord." (Exodus 14:13 ). Salvation cannot really be SEEN. It is the CONSEQUENCES
of salvation that can be seen. Israel SAW that they were delivered from the Egyptians by the saving grace of
God. Revelation 1:7 says: "Every eye shall SEE him." Jesus said (John 14:19) "The world will SEE me no
more." What the world WILL see will be the trouble, the punishments, and the blessings which the Lord will
offer to all so that they will have a full opportunity to live eternally, if obedient (repentant and reformed from
their former disobedience).
109
Spokorna molitev bolnega: prošnja, naj ga Bog ne kaznuje v jezi, temve ga ozdravi (v. 2–4a), naj ga reši
smrti (v. 4b–6); trpljenje je silno (v. 7–8), toda Bog trpe ega rešuje sovražnikov (v. 9–11). V Cerkvi velja kot
prvi spokorni psalm; drugi so Ps 32; 38; 51; 102; 130; 143.
45
Vendar, spokorna molitev bolnega ne kon a v perspektivi bolezen smrt, ampak se simbolno
znajde in v vsej silovitosti vzravna, ozdravi in se kon no in kot poslednja dvigne dvigne v
Božjo hvalo! Ta je vedno z vsemi znamenji in simboli zape atena in nepogrešljiva v Božjem
ljudstvu... Ta silni »vzdig« velikokrat manjka pri našem bogoslužju, ker je zelo rimskoracionalno. Vendar, »evharistija« je, kot vemo, ne le v besedi, ampak je dejansko
zahvaljevanje. In tu tolikokrat obstanemo na pol poti. V Izraelu pa ima bogo astje (in samo
tu) neko osnovno zna ilnost, ki je spominjanje (na veli astna Božja dela). Prav tu vznikne
dinamika zahvaljevanja, ki jo podkrepijo simbolne skupine »dvigovanja« in zato je Jud
prisiljen govoriti in odgovarjati na vprašanja kot so: » e te tvoj sin vpraša kaj naj pomenijo
ti kamni...?« Ali »Kaj pomeni ta no ....?« (Pashalni obred) in se spontano zahvaljuje.
Liturgija je (in bi vedno morala biti) pravi in živi dvig v ta »SEDAJ« Božjega vzrokovanja –
psihološko torej pomeni v star del možganov, kjer je vse samo »sedaj«. In iz te neposrednosti
je trenuten in povsem organski vzgib-zahvaljevanje. Po udežu deseterih gobavih ozdravljenih
Kristus za udeno sprašuje: »Kje pa je drugih devet? Ali se niso našli, da bi dali zahvalo
Bogu?«
Od simbolov si tukaj oglejmo samo simbol o esa in solza.
Solza je seveda simbol bole ine in posredništva. Velikokrat je primerjana z biserom – solza,
biser bole ine, o i.
Simbol o esa je simbol intelektualnega opažanja, spregledanja, uvida. V neposredni
povezanosti je z simbolom LU I – tako nastopa v evangelijih. » e je tvoje oko zdravo, je
vse telo svetlo..., e pa se tvoje notranje oko stemni, kolika bo tema«.
Ob njem se ustvarjajo tudi dualisti ni pomeni. »Duša ima dve o esi«, piše Silezius, »eno
gelda as, drugo pa je obrnjeno k ve nemu.« Eno je ljubezen, drugo skrbi za delo. Platon in
Klemen Aleksandrijski, oko duše ni samo edinito ampak tudi nepremi no; sposobno je sinteze
in globalnega opažanja. Isti izraz za oko srca in oko duha sre amo pri Plotinu. Sre amo ga
tudi pri vseh muslimanskih sufijih.
Gledajo e oko je simbol Božjega spoznanja. Nadnaravnega opažanja. V nekaterih kulturah
je povezano z simbolom ognja. Egipt ga slika na vseh svojih simbolnih upodobitvah, saj
pomeni izvor magi nega fluida. Z njim so okrašeni sarkofagi, saj mrtvemu omogo a, da brez
gibanja spremlja ves zunanji svet. V Islamu pomenja najglobljo identiteto (nekaj takega kot
sodobne naju inkovitejše sledilne in identifikacijske naprave). Vzhodne tradicije govore o
»zlem o esu«, simbolu zlega , na katerega so ob utljivi otroci, konji, mladoporo eni, psi, pa
tudi mleko in pšenica.
Stara in Nova zaveza hranita svojo silno sporo ilnost in dinamiko v tem simbolu:»Videli
boste Božjo slavo, kakor slavo Edinorojenega...«; »Vsako oko ga bo videlo« (Razodetje 1, 7);
»Svet me ne bo ve videl...« (Jn 14, 19). In s tem v zvezi tudi: »Svet vas bo sovražil...« in
grdo gledal.
Psalm 29
Psalm 29 je hvalnica.
Silovitost Božjega vzrokovanja je najgloblje simbolizirana z mo mi narave in razli nimi
simboli in simbolnimi združbami, ki jo presentirajo. Od silovitih teofanij, ki so povezane z
dajanjem Postave svojemu ljudstvu, pa vse do najglobljih vzgibov duše, kjer lovek nekako
podaljšuje svoje dojemanje s simboli naravnih mo i, se tovrstno doživljanja, polno svetega
srha, najgloblje vtiskuje v Pisemske pripovedi in dušo, ki jih odprto bere.
Tudi Kristus bo prišel v enakem scenariju »Na oblakih neba, v veliki mo i in slavi« »in vsi
angeli z njim«.
Tukaj bom spet samo skromno ilustriral silovito delovanje, ki ga sprožajo razli ni scenariji
pripovedi, metafore in simboli in njihova svojstvena dinamika Psalmov.
46
Hebrejsko vokalizirano besedilo (ob angleškem standardnem nejudovskem prevodu):
Ps 29
(' #
>" , ('
3&,& *)A)
+A ,&*'- ,
1 A Psalm of David. Ascribe unto the LORD,
O ye sons of might, ascribe unto the LORD
glory and strength.
2 Ascribe unto the LORD the glory due unto
#*) &*'- , ('
+ &<- & " His name; worship the LORD in the beauty of
, (,%4
holiness.
+ "
)-
3 8, #
, *<
&*'- -
+ & " , *< #%-" , - *<
-
, " , # A
-5
'*)- 5 7,5
*>'
+
"&) ,
'
, *<
+5
*>'F A
3 The voice of the LORD is upon the waters;
{N}
the God of glory thundereth, even the LORD
upon many waters.
4 The voice of the LORD is powerful; the
voice of the LORD is full of majesty.
5 The voice of the LORD breaketh the cedars;
yea, the LORD breaketh in pieces the cedars
of Lebanon.
# 1- *
)- &< I
, 6 He maketh them also to skip like a calf;
+ ) Lebanon and Sirion like a young wild-ox.
*
'
#'!% , - *<
7 The voice of the LORD heweth out flames
of fire.
% # "&) % , *< 8 The voice of the LORD shaketh the
+ &< wilderness; the LORD shaketh the wilderness
of Kadesh.
3 * J7K
%I
, -- *I *
% , *< 9 The voice of the LORD maketh the hinds to
+&*'- ) *F; --*6 '( calve, and strippeth the forests bare; {N}
and in His temple all say: 'Glory.'
) , 'I
, #'
(
"8
*8 -
' ,
11 The LORD will give strength unto His
A -- ,
+ *@' people; the LORD will bless his people with
#5
4 *8
,
10 The LORD sat enthroned at the flood; yea,
the LORD sitteth as King for ever.
+ *
peace. {P}
Božje veli astvo v nevihti
29110
110
Hvalnica, ki opisuje Božji prihod v nevihti. Tukaj si poglejte nazaj, vzporedno predbibli no mezopotamsko
besedilo!
Vr. 1a :Gr., lat. v naslovu dolo ata uporabo tega psalma: ob sklepu šotorskega praznika (prim. 5 Mz 16,13), ko
so Judje prosili za dež (prim. Zah 14,16–19).
2b: v svetem okrasju db. ob blesku svetiš a ali ob blesku svetosti; gr., lat., sir. na njegovem svetem dvoriš u;
Hieronim tukaj v svetem okrasju, v Ps 96,9a v okrasju svetiš a.
47
1 Davidov psalm.
Dajajte GOSPODU, Božji sinovi,
dajajte GOSPODU slavo in mo !
2 Dajajte GOSPODU slavo njegovega imena,
padite na kolena pred GOSPODOM v svetem okrasju!111
3 Glas GOSPODOV je nad vodami,
Bog veli astva grmi,
GOSPOD je nad silnimi vodami.
4 Glas GOSPODOV je v mo i,
glas GOSPODOV je v sijaju.
5 Glas GOSPODOV lomi cedre,
GOSPOD lomi cedre libanonske.
6 Daje, da Libanon poskakuje kakor teli ek,
Sirjón kakor mlad bivol.
7 Glas GOSPODOV siplje ognjene plamene.
8 Glas GOSPODOV pretresa puš avo,
GOSPOD pretresa kadéško puš avo.
9 Glas GOSPODOV pretresa košute v porodnih bole inah
in razgalja gozdove;
v njegovem templju vse pravi: »Slava!«
10 GOSPOD je prestoloval nad potopom,
GOSPOD prestoluje kot kralj na veke.
11 GOSPOD daje mo svojemu ljudstvu,
GOSPOD bo blagoslovil svoje ljudstvo z mirom.
_________________________________________________________________________
Ta hvalnica pomeni silno in mo no pri evanje o tem, kako je Izrael, v svojem živem
izkustvu vere, globoko verjel v Stvarnika in Stvarniku in bil nanj naslonjen. (Seveda mo na
ob utja božanskega, ki so povezana z nevihto in drugimi naravnimi mo mi niso poznana
samo v Izraelu, ampak so lastna tudi drugim narodom (stara literatura Akadcev)112; posebej
6b:Sirjón je kánaansko ime za sveto goro Hermon (2760 m) na jugu Antilibanona; prim. 42,7; 89,13; 133,3; 5
Mz 3,9.
7 :ognjene plamene: podoba ozna uje bliske; prim. Hab 3,11; Nah 3,3.
9ab:Besedilo negotovo; gr., lat. Glas Gospodov, ki pripravlja jelene in bo odkril goš ave.
111
Tudi to mesto se mi ne zdi dovolj dobro prevedeno. Sveto okrasje je namre tako nejasno. Dejansko gre za
sposobnost lepega, da spregovori o BOŽJEM, ki je lepo. To pa je tipi na simbolna dejavnost. V tem smislu
Knjiga modrosti pravi: » ejih že tako prevzame njihova lepota, da jih imajo za bogove, naj spoznajo, koliko
lepši je njihov Gospodar; ustvaril jih je sam ZA ETNIK LEPOTE« (13, 3).
112
Znana je akadska himna pod imenom »HYMN TO INANNA« , ki jo tu, v podtekstu, prinašam v
celoti iz angleškega vira. ----God as "She": The Hymn of Enheduanna, Daughter of Sargon II of Akkad, Princess
Imperial of Sumer and Akkad and Priestess of Inanna and the Moon in Ur: c. 2300 b.c., to Inanna, goddess of
love, war and life. Enheduanna is the first “author” named in Western history. Compare this with the quiet,
domestic tone of the Homeric Hymn to Demeter: Enheduanna makes Inanna more like Zeus or Marduk, calling
her by the masculine titles Lord, Commander and King as well as Lady and Queen:
O Queen of the Seven Gods, O radiant splendor/of light, fountain of life, darling of Heaven /and Earth, priest,
daughter and servant of Heaven!/jewelled and crowned with life, born to be Lord,/in your hand are the guardian
spirits of the Seven Gods,/and you yourself guard and protect the guardian spirits, you have taken them up and
tied them to your hands,/have gathered them in and pressed them to your breast./You can fill the land with
poison like a snake,/plants vanish from the earth when you thunder like Anu, /at your command the floods come
down from the mountain./Supreme in power, Inanna of Heaven and Earth, /whose mouth rains sparkles of
lightning over the land,/mistress of beasts, given the gods’ life-spirits/by An, by An given the unfailing Word/to
speak at his fateful command: who can fathom your glory?/...O wild and rampant, eldest daughter of the
Moon,/Queen greater than An, who can pay you sufficient homage?/Queen of Queens, who in accordance with
the spirits/were greater than your mother the moment you were born, /wise and knowing queen of all the
lands,/mother of men and animals, I sing your praise.../I have entered before you in my holy garments,/I the
princess imperial, Enheduanna, /singing as I carried your ritual baskets,/High Priestess of the Moon. But now no
longer /can I serve the goodly temple that I established,/for the day that dawns in Ur scorches my skin /and the
48
izpri ana so seveda znotraj konglomerata babilonske kulture).113 V tem pogledu bi mogel
navesti cele biblioteke literature in navedkov o tem114, vendar naj omenim samo poznano delo
sand of the Southwind overwhelms me at nightfall,/My honey sweet voice is hoarse and strident /and all that
gave me pleasure has fallen to dust./I, what am I among living creatures! /An, An, give to punishment the rebels
/that hate Inanna, and split their cities’ walls! /Enlil, curse them, and let their children perish/with no mother
there to soothe them! /...The queen of queens, the prop of all the nations, /accepted Enheduanna’s prayers. Her
heart /was again as of old, the day became propitious, /Inanna showered her beauty and allure and joy like silver
moonlight over our land!/Ancient Nanu in wonder and awe, and Ningal her mother, worshiped her at the templ’s
doorstep./Priestess, queen, noble commander of gods, destroyer of barbarians, whom An made protector of
spirits, /Queen, clothed in allure and attraction, Inanna: Praise!
113
Fiery Gods: Yahweh, Marduk, Asshur, the Queen of Heaven, Ahura-Mazdah, et. al. (Walter Reinhold Warttig Mattfeld y de la
Torre, M.A. Ed.)
The Pentateuchal narrator understands that the whole Israelite nation assembles itself about the foot of Mount Sinai to witness God's descent
in full view of the nation and to hear him speak directly to them. We are told that God appears in the form a great storm-cloud full of lighting
and thunder, and that when God actually descends upon the mount it erupts into fire. The nation is later reminded that they are to make no
image of God to worship because when they looked into God's great fire, they saw no image, only fire.
In this brief article we will explore the Ancient Near Eastern notion of gods possessing fiery bodies and note the parallels with Hebrew
concepts of Yahweh as a fiery God.
The earliest hint we get of God's fiery nature is in Genesis, and Abraham's encounter with God. Abraham slaughters some sacrifical animals
and cuts their bodies in half, then, evidently God passes between them in a fiery form as a flaming torch"As the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell on Abram; and lo a dread and great darkness fell upon him. Then the Lord said to Abram,
Know of a surety that your descendants will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs, and will be slaves there, and they shall be oppressed for
four hundred years...When the sun had gone down and it was dark, behold a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch passed between these
pieces. On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abraham, saying, To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the
great river, the river Euphrates..." (Genesis 15:12-19 RSV)
Cumming notes that Marduk. the supreme god of Babylon was likened to being a torch, apparently like Yahweh in Abraham's dream"Lofty in form, Marduk, shining sun god, bright torch, who by his rising illuminates the darkness, makes brilliant..." (p.108, "Hymn to
Marduk #1," Charles Gordon Cumming. The Assyrian and Hebrew Hymns of Praise. New York. AMS Press. [1934] 1966)
The "Queen of Heaven," the Sumerian Inanna/Inana, is also called a torch which lights up the heavens, alluding to her as Venus, the
evening star"You alone are magnificent...Your divinity shines in the pure heavens like Nanna [the Moon-god] or Utu [the Sun-god]. Your torch lights
up the corners of the heaven, turning darkness into light...You excercise full ladyship over heaven and earth." (ETCSSL, "A Hymn to Inana
[Inana C])
"Great light, heavenly lioness...lioness of heaven...As you rise in the morning sky lie a flame visible from afar, and at your bright appearance
in the evening sky...All the countries are building a house for you as for the risen sun; a shining (?) torch is assigned to you, the light of the
land." (ETCSL "Hymn to Inana as Ninegala [Inana D]; ETCSL= The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature, Oxford University, url :
http://www-etcsl.orient.ox.ac.uk/section4/tr4074.htm)
God's fiery nature is alluded to again when Moses encounters a burning bush in the wilderness of Sinai"Now Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in;aw, Jethro, the priest of Midian; and he led his flock to the west side of the wilderness,
and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. And the angel of the LORD appeared to him in a flame of fire out the midst of a bush...God
called to him out of the bush...Moses, Moses...I am the God of your father, and the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.
And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God. Then the Lord said I have seen the affliction of my people.... (Exodus 3:1-7)
Mettinger notes that Melqart of Tyre was another fiery god asociated with a fiery tree whose branches were not consumed"...Nonnos of the 4th century CE tells of an oracle instructing the first men on earth to build a ship and land on floating rocks...on which grew
an olive-tree...enveloped by a fire that did not consume its branches...Nonnos is also the one who designates Melqart as "prince of fire,"
a designation to be compared with the reading on a seal found at Tyre: lmlqrt rsp, in which rsp might be a cognate of Hebrew resep,
"burning coal."
(p.97. Tryggve N.D. Mettinger. No Graven Image ? Israelite Aniconism in its Ancient Near Eastern Context. Stockholm. Almqvist &
Wiksell. 1995. ISB 91-22-01664-3 pbk)
Moses recounts to his people the day they all saw God at Mt. Horeb/Sinai and heard his words"Only take heed, and keep your soul diligently, lest you forget the things which your eyes have seen..how on the day you stood before the
LORD your God at Horeb...And you came near and stood at the foot of the mountain, while the mountain burned with fire to the heart of
heaven, wrapped in darkness, cloud and gloom. Then the LORD spoke to you out of the midst of the fire; you saw no form; there was only a
voice. And he declared to you his covenant...Therefore take good heed to yourselves. Since you saw no form on the day the LORD spoke to
you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire, beware lest you act corruptly by making a graven image for yourselves, in the form of any
figure...For the LORD your God is a devouring fire, a jealous God...Did any people ever hear the voice of a god speaking out of the midst
of the fire, as you have heard, and still live ? ...he let you see his great fire, and you heard his words out of the midst of the fire." (Deut 4:936)
God assumes the form of a pillar of fire ( I am not aware of any myths where a god is portrayed as a "pillar of fire").
"And in the morning watch the LORD in the pillar of fire and of cloud looked down upon the host of the Egyptians and discomfited the host
of the Egyptians..." (Exodus 14:24)
We will now look at some gods whose natures were fieryThe "Queen of Heaven," Ishtar/Inanna is called "a flame", revealing her fiery nature"To the pure flame that fills the heavens, to the light of heaven, Ishtar, who shines like the sun, to the mighty Queen of Heaven, Ishtar, I
address greeting." (p.25, Langdon)
The evening star, the star which shines pre-eminent in the heavens is represented by...Ishtar.-..
49
"Light of heaven which flames like fire over the earth art thou." (p.109, Hymn #6 to Ishtar, Cumming)
"She that flameth in the horizon of heaven." (p.109, Hymn to Ishtar #4, Cumming)
Speaking of Marduk, before his confronation with Tiamat in the Babylonian Enuma Elish hymn"His body was filled with an ever-blazing flame. He made a net to encircle Tiamat within it..."
(p.251, Stephanie Dalley. Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh and Others. Oxford University Press. 1991, pbk.)
"...Marduk, or the god of fire. His assistance was implored with the following words: 'Fire, destroyer of enemies, terrible weapon which
destroys the plague, brilliant fire, destroy this evil." (p.105, Charles Seignobos [translator: David Macrae]. The World of Babylon, Nineveh
and Assyria. New York. Leon Amiel , publisher [Paris. Libraire Armand Colin. Editions Minerva, S.A. Geneve. 1975])
"Nusku has an independent character as a god associated with fire and light. Sometimes Gibil the fire god is described as the son of Nusku.
In magical incantations, Nusku is among the gods called upon to assist in the burning of sorcerers and witches. In the Neo-Assyrian
period, Nusku was among the gods who were worshipped together at Harran...The symbol of a lamp sometimes occuring in Mesopotamian
art from the Kassite to Neo-Babylonian periods is labeled on Kudurrus as an emblem of Nusku." (p.145, "Nusku," Black & Green)
"Likewise Nusku is a solar deity:
Strong fire god who surveys the tops of mountains, mighty fire god, illuminator of the darkness." (p.108, "Hymn to Nusku #1, Cumming)
Sayce understands that the Phoenicians conceived their god, Melqart of Tyre, as a fiery god"The temples of Melkarth were said to have been without images, and no women, dogs, or swine were allowed within them. The fire that
symbolized him burnt perpetually on his altar..." (p.197, The Phoenicians," A.H. Sayce. The Ancient Empires of the East. New York.
Scribner's Sons. 1911)
A West Semitic god associated with fire is Reshep, whose name rsp means "fire""Reshep. West Semitic god is connected with rsp, 'fire,.' He is an ancient god and already appears in the Ebla pantheon. In Ugarit...he was
popular enough to receive regular offerings...He was identified with the Babylonian chthonic god Nergal. The Egyptians adopted him too; as
a plague god he was invoked to fight against the forces of evil. The Phoenicians left several carvings of this god in Cyprus, Anatolia and
Syria." (p.143, "Reshep," Gwendolyn Leick. A Dictionary of Ancient Near Eastern Mythology. London. Routledge. 1991, 1998. ISBN 0-41519811-9 pbk)
The Persians evidently conceived of their god, Ahura-Mazdah, as fiery, being portrayed within a winged sun-disk, and the fire on the
altar was understood to be a manifestation of his holy spirit"Deinon explains that the Magi sacrifice under the open sky because they believe that fire and water are the only emblems of divinty."
(p.478, Olmstead)
"As fire of Ahura-mazda, you are delightful to us, as his holiest spirit you are delightful to us. What name of yours is most propitious, fire
of Ahura-mazda, with...Good thought, beneficient righteousness, deeds, and words and doctrine, we draw near to you." (p.234, "Yasna to
Atar or Fire," Olmstead)
Fire is portrayed erupting out of God's mouth"Smoke went up from his nostrils, and devouring fire from his mouth; glowing coals flamed forth from him." (Psalm 18:8, and 2 Samuel
22:9)
"Bel...was begotten...Marduk was born...when his lips moved, fire blazed forth," (p.235-6, "Epic of Creation," Stephanie Dalley. Myths
From Mesopotamia, Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh and Others. New York. Oxford University Press. 1989, 1991)
Nergal is also portrayed as possessing a fiery mouth"Prince of shining face and flaming mouth, raging fire god." (p.114, "Hymn to Nergal # 5," Cumming)
God is capable of raining down from heaven fire on his enemies:
Elijah speaking to soldiers sent by king Ahaziah to arrest him"If I am a man of God, may fire fall from heaven and consume you and your company ! Fire fell from heaven and consumed the officer
and his men." (2 Kings 1:10)
A Neo-Assyrian hymn portrays Asshur, the supreme god of Assyria, as a firey glow in the heavens -evidently he is the sun that comes forth
from the heavenly gates each morning- hurling down fire on Assyria's enemies, just like Yahweh. Click here for an image of Asshur as a
fiery god in a sun disk.
"You [the Assyrian King] opened your mouth and cried:
Hear me, O Asshur ! I heard your cry. I issued forth as a firey glow from the gate of heaven, to hurl down fire and have it devour
them...I drove them up the mountain and rained (hail) stones and fire of heaven upon them." Simo Parpola, Assyrian Prophecies, State
Archives of Assyria, Vol. IX, Helsinki Univ. Press, 1997)
"Marduk is frequently described as the fire-god, "the flame which causes the foes to be burned" (p.157, Langdon)
"With his flame steep mountains are destroyed." (p.136, Hymn to Marduk #5, Cumming)
"Bel, thine abode is Babylon...thou contollest laws by thy laws...thou burnest up the mighty ones by thy flame (?)." (p.315, Stephen H.
Langdon. The Mythology of All Races, Semitic, Vol. 5. London. Oxford University Press. 1931)
Pritchard notes that Inanna/Ishtar, "The Queen of Heaven," is capable of raining down fire from heaven"...who rain flaming fire over the land." (p.127, "Adoration of Inanna of Ur," James B. Pritchard, Editor. The Ancient Near East, A New
Anthology of Texts and Pictures, Vol.2.Princeton University Press. 1975. ISBN 0-691-00209-6 pbk)
A Sumerian hymn to Inanna speaks of her ability to rain fire down from heaven upon the earth, just like Yahweh"As a flood descending upon (?) those foreign lands, powerful one of heaven and earth, you're their Inana. Raining blazing fire down upon
the the land, endowed with divine powers by An...You confer strength on the storm." (ETCSL "The Exaltation of Inana [Inana B])
"Nusku who burns up and overpowers the foe." (p.138, Hymn to Nusku #3, Cunmming)
"Nusku, mighty warrior god, who burns up the evil doer..." (p.151, Hymn to Nusku #2, Cumming)
"Esarhaddon too uses the imagery of fire to describe his fierce onslaught, calling it 'a scorching flame, the fire (-god) untiring...So Tiglathpileser I had called himself ' a burning flame,' a grand flame that is rained on the enemy land like a torrential downpour." (p.250 Martin
L. West. The East Face of Helicon, West Asiatic Elements in Greek Poetry and Myth. Oxford. Clarendon Press. 1997)
Several hymns call Marduk "the sun" or "Bull-calf of the sun," (Sumerian myths make the sun the son of the moon-god, Nanna who was
called the "young calf" in hymns, his daughter, Inanna/Ishtar, "the exalted cow of heaven," was the twin sister of the sun) which was
understood to be of a fiery natureSumerian hymns address the sun, called Utu, as a "calf""Youthful Utu..., calf of the wild cow, calf of the wild cow, calf of the righteous son, Utu, royal brother of Inana...Utu: the orphans look to
you as their father, Utu, you succor the widows as their mother." (ETCSL "A shir-namshub to Utu [Utu F])
50
On occasion, Sumerian hymns call the Sun a "Wild Bull""Gaze upon him, gaze upon him ! O Utu gaze upon him, gaze upon him ! O wild bull of the E-babbar, gaze upon him..." ( ETCSL "A shirnamshub to Utu [Utu E], The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature, http://www-etcsl.orient.ox.ac.uk/section4/tr432e.htm)
"Marduk. His name was usually written logographically as amar.UD...amar.UD may be read as a genitive construction, 'the young bull of
the sun,' or as an apposition, meaning something like, 'the son, the sun..." Although there was no genealogical relationship between
Shamash and Marduk, there was much the two deities had in common, especially the aspects of justice, impartiality, and compassion...The
nature of Marduk became increasingly complex as he gradually absorbed the functions and characteristics of many other gods." (pp.115-6,
"Marduk," Gwendolyn Leick. A Dictionary of Ancient Near Eastern Mythology. London. Routledge. 1998. ISBN 0-415-19811-9 pbk)
"Marduk...it is difficult to identify specific traits in his character, but magic and wisdom (derived from his connection with Asarluhi), water
and vegetation (connected with his father Ea) and judgement suggesting a connection with the sun god Shamash (Utu) can be adduced. In
the reign of Sennacherib (704-681 BC), however, some aspects of Marduk's cult, mythology and rituals, were attributed to the Assyrian state
god, Asshur." (p.129, "Marduk." Jeremy Black and Anthony Green. Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia, An Illustrated
Dictionary. Austin, Texas. University of Texas Press. 1992 ISBN 0-292-70794-0 pbk)
"Bull-calf of the sun" was a popular etymological explanation of Marduk's name..." (p.129, "Marduk," Black and Green)
Nebuchadrezzar addresses Marduk as the Sun-god"King of Babylon whom Merodach, the Sun, the great Lord, for the holy places of his city Babylon hath called, am I: and Bit-Saggatu and
Bit-Zida like the radiance of the Sun I restored: the fanes of the great gods I completely brightened."
(Library collection: "World's Greatest Literature" Published work: "Babylonian and Assyrian Literature"Translator: Rev. J. M. Rodwell,
M.A. Publisher: P. F. Collier & Son, New York Copyright: Colonial Press, 1901)
The Zoroasterian prayer addressed to the fire on the altar alludes to its being of the sun, thus linking Ahura-Mazda in with winged sundisc with the sun"But other ancient Indo-Iranian gods have returned as accepted deities little inferior to Ahura-Mazdah himself. First of all stands Atar, the
fire-god, who is honored by one entire prayer:
'Through the action of this fire we draw near to you, Mazdah-Ahura, through your holiest spirit, who is also torment to him for whom
you have hastened torment. As the most joyful may you come to us, fire of Mazdah-Ahura, as holiest spirit are you his joy. What name of
yours is most propitious, fire of Mazdah-Ahura, with that would we draw near to you. With good thought, with good righteousness, with
good deeds and words of the good doctrine would we hear you/ We do obeisance to you, we thank you Mazdah-Ahura; with all good
thought, with all good words, with all good deeeds we draw near to you, Mazdah-Ahura; here the light and there that highest of the high,
which is called the sun." (pp.473-4, "Religions Dying and Living," Olmstead. History of the Persian Empire)
Bas-reliefs exist from the period of Darius I (ca. 521-486 BCE) showing what appears to be their supreme god, Ahura-Mazda within a
winged sun-disk hovering over a fire altar the king stands before. Still later, in the Sasanid period (2nd-3rd centuries CE), Sasanian coins
show the head and shoulders of beared man wearing a crown amidst the flames of a fire altar. This motif suggests that Ahura-Mazda
was understood to be present in the fire on the altar.
Xenophon, a Greek (ca. 5th century BCE), noted the Persians worshipped the sun, probably alluding to Ahura-mazdah as the god in the
winged sun-disc appearing on the walls of the Persian palace at Persepolis"...the worshippers sacrifice to Zeus and make a holocaust of bulls; they also burn bulls to the sun..." (p.478, Xenophon being cited on
Persian customs in A.T. Olmstead. History of the Persian Empire. Phoenix Books. University of Chicago Press. 1948, 1963)
Conclusions:
God's fiery nature is paralled by several gods and goddesses appearing in the pre-exilic myths of the Mesopotamians, Phoenicians,
Canaanites, Babylonians, Assyrians as well as the peoples of Harran, where Abraham's kin purportedly settled. The Persians also conceived
of their high god, Ahura-Mazda as fiery too. These gods possess not only fiery bodies, but at times, fire comes out of their mouths like
Yahweh (Marduk), and they can "rain fire down from heaven" on their enemies like Yahweh (Asshur, Marduk, and the Queen of Heaven,
Ishtar/Inanna).
Malachi notes God will destroy his enemies with fire on "the Day of the Lord," but that the SUN OF RIGHTEOUSNESS WITH
HEALING IN ITS WINGS will care for the righteous"For behold, the day comes, burning like an oven, when all the arrogant and evil doers will be stubble; the day that comes shall burn them
all up, says the LORD of hosts, so that it will leave them neither root nor branch. But for you who fear my name the sun of righteousness
shall rise with healing in its wings." (Malachi 4:1-3)
It is my understanding that Malachi's description of Yahweh, metaphorically likening him to the winged sun-disc, mirrors the concept that
the Babylonians had of their supreme god, Marduk, who came to be assimilated to the Sun, which was associated with justice, the burning of
the unjust, and compassion for the righteous. The Assyrians by Sennacherib's time had pre-empted Marduk's attributes assigning them to
their supreme god, Asshur, who also appears in the winged Sun-disc. The Bible tells us the kings of Israel and Judah were influenced by
Assyrian and Babylonian beliefs, and worshipped the sun, so Malachi's metaphorical imagery may be reflecting the pre-exilic notions of the
Neo-Assyrian and Babylonian periods.
Yahweh is the leader of a host, or army, identified as a heavenly army. The Mesopotamians believed that stars possessed swords, they are
warriors, for example the 7 Sebitti gods are symbolized by 7 dots or stars, representing the Pleiades star constellation, they were ferocious
warriors who accompanied the great gods, like Asshur, Ishtar, Marduk and Erra. Sooo- Yahweh "Sebaoth" (1 Sam 1:3), "Yahweh of the
Heavenly army," is associated with warrior stars similar to the "Sebitti" (any puns here between Sebaoth and Sebitti ?) and like Marduk, is
their leader (cf. also Judges 5:20, where the stars metaphorically fight in the heavens).
"Marduk. the god of Babylon, also known as Bel-Marduk, was the god of the sun and the prince of the legions of stars." (p.95,
Seignobos)
Dalley notes that Erra was an aspect of Nergal, or Mars, one of the stars in the heavens, and that other stars carry swords"The star of Erra is twinkling and carries rays...His mantle of radiance will be activated(?) and all people will perish. As for (?) the dazzling
stars of heaven that carry a sword (?)..." (p.295-6, Dalley)
114
Enuma Elish, aka The Epic of Creation (Babylonian)
Heidel A. 'The Babylonian Genesis', The University of Chicago Press, 2nd ed 1951, pp. 1-60.
Dalley S. 'Myths From Mesopotamia', Oxford University Press, 1998 ed, pp. 228-77.
Pritchard J.B. 'Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament' (ANET), Princeton University Press, 3rd ed. 1969, pp. 60-72, 5013.
Jacobsen T. 'The Treasures of Darkness', Yale University Press, 1976, pp. 167-91.
(Note: Enuma Elish includes the Battle of Ea and Apsu, the Battle of Marduk and Tiamat, the Creation of Heaven and Earth and the Creation
of Man from the blood of Kingu.)
The New Year Festival of Bel-Marduk at Babylon (Akkadian)
The Creation of the World by Marduk (Babylonian)
Heidel A. 'The Babylonian Genesis', op. cit., pp. 61-63.
Hymn to Marduk (Babylonian)
The Creation of Living Creatures, aka The Legend of the Two Little Ones (Assyrian)
Heidel A. 'The Babylonian Genesis', op. cit., p. 64.
When Anu had Created the Heavens and Ea had Built the Apsu (Babylonian)
Creation of Man by the Mother-Goddess (Old Babylonian/Assyrian)
Dalley S. 'Myths From Mesopotamia', op. cit., pp. 14-18.
The Creation of Man by Enki and Ninmah (Sumerian)
Kramer S.N. 'Sumerian Mythology', University of Pennsylvania Press, pp. 68-72.
Kramer S.N. 'History Begins at Sumer', University of Pennsylvania Press, 3rd ed 1981, pp. 106-8.
Kramer S.N. 'The Sumerians', op. cit., pp. 150-51.
Another Account of the Creation of Man, aka The Legend of Ulligarra and Zalgarra (Assyrian)
The Myth of the Pickaxe (Sumerian)
Jacobsen T. 'Toward the Image of Tammuz', Harvard University Press, 1970, pp. 111-14.
(Note: this text includes the creation of Man by Enlil and his assignment to the Anunnaki)
Erra and Ishum, aka The Erra Epic (Babylonian)
Dalley S. 'Myths From Mesopotamia', Oxford University Press, 1998 ed, pp. 282-315.
The Atra-Hasis Epic, aka When The Gods As Men (Babylonian & Neo-Assyrian)
Heidel A. 'The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels', op. cit., pp. 106-16.
Jacobsen T. 'The Treasures of Darkness', op. cit., pp. 116-21.
(Note: this text includes the Rebellion of the Anunnaki, the Creation of Man by the Mother-Goddess and the Flood)
The Epic of Gilgamesh (Sumerian & Akkadian)
Pritchard J.B. 'ANET', op. cit., pp. 47-52, 72-99, 503-7.
Heidel A. 'The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels', The University of Chicago Press, 2nd ed 1949, pp. 1-101.
Gardner J. & Maier J. 'Gilgamesh', Vintage Books, 1985.
Kramer S.N. 'History Begins at Sumer', op. cit., pp. 172-80 (Sumerian version).
Kramer S.N. 'The Sumerians: Their History, Culture and Character', University of Chicago Press, 1963, pp. 190-97 (Sumerian version).
(Note: this text includes the legend of Utnapishtim's Flood)
Gilgamesh and the King of Kish, aka Gilgamesh and Agga (Sumerian)
The Death of Dumuzi, aka His Heart Was Filled With Tears (Sumerian)
The Death of Dumuzi, aka The Most Bitter Cry (Sumerian)
The Death of Dumuzi, aka The Wild Bull Who Has Lain Down (Babylonian)
The Death of Dumuzi, aka My Heart Plays a Reed Pipe (Sumer/Babylonian)
Lamentations for Damu (Sumerian)
Jacobsen T. 'The Treasures of Darkness', op. cit., pp. 63-73, 105-6.
The Flood, the Founding of the First Cities and the Legend of Ziusudra (Sumerian)
The Instructions of Shuruppak to his Son Utnapishtim (Akkadian)
The Worm and the Toothache (Akkadian)
(Note: this text is interesting for its brief cosmological material)
The Creation of Moon and Sun (Sumerian & Babylonian)
A Hymn to the River (Babylonian)
The Myth of Cattle and Grain, aka The Legend of Lahar and Ashnan (Sumerian)
Kramer S.N. 'History Begins at Sumer', op. cit., pp. 108-10.
Dispute Between Summer and Winter (Sumerian)
Kramer S.N. 'History Begins at Sumer', op. cit., pp. 133-36, 304.
The Deluge Account of Berossus (Babylonian)
Heidel A. 'The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels', op. cit., pp. 116-18.
The Creation of Heaven, Earth and Mankind, according to Berossus (Babylonian)
The Slaying of the Labbu (Babylonian & Assyrian)
Hammurabi's Law Code (Babylonian)
Poems about El, Baal, Yamm, Mot, Asherah, Anath, Lotan, Zaphon etc (Canaanite)
The Legend of King Keret (Hittite)
The Tale of Aqhat (Hittite)
The Song of Ullikummis, aka The Kumarbis Cycle (Hittite)
Kingship in Heaven (Hittite)
Prayer to the Sun-goddess of Arinna (Hittite)
The Moon that Fell from Heaven (Hittite)
51
52
The Seven Tablets of Creation (predvsem prvi zvezek; v opombi pa natisnem eno vidnejših
razprav s tega podro ja).
M tem komentarju mi gre le za postavitev ozadja.
V Psalmu samem pa vidimo – in v simbolih se nam to prepri anje še intenzivneje
»zastirajo e-odkriva«, kako vse, kar Izvoljeno ljudstvo v svetu gleda in vidi, niso predmeti,
ampak so STVARI – torej od Boga (Jahveja) ustvarjene danosti. Tu je najgloblji odmik
zavesti od MALIKOVALSTVA (ki ga dobro pokaže tudi devterokanoni na knjiga Modrosti,
ki sem jo že omenil).
Seveda so simboli v tem »gledanju« ali bolje motrenju, stvar najglobljega lovekovega
doživljanja in sicer najglobljega psihi no-duhovnega doživljanja, zato je simbolno, ki v tem
primeru najprej pride naproti, prav simbol nevihte. To je dinami na podoba rasti, podoba, ki
je vsa v nastajanju, v stopnjevanju. Spreletava naz groza, objema nepredvidljivost, negotovost
in hkratno raste zaupanje. Ambivalentnost simbolnega je torej v svojem zna ilnem delovanju
globoko v nas.
Iz te prihajajo e vizije, ki ni videti konca in je predvidljiva (ker je simbolna), se v isti mo i, ki
jo simbolno oživi, naposledku dvigne HVALA, ki se kar trikrat ponovi115, da bi se pokazala,
kot odmev, in odmev odmeva v globini loveške duše – hvala STVARNIKU, Gospodu,
Edinemu Bogu! Ni je mo i, ki je ve ja od njega – je spoznanje v ozadju.
V Pismu nevihta, vihar, orkani... in sli ni simboli predstavljajo Božansko posredovanje in
bližino. »Glej hud vihar, toda Gospod ni bil v viharju...« nam je znano kot Elijevo videnje
Gospoda.
Seveda imajo vsi ti simboli po vrsti, e naj tudi tu poudarim, veliko duhovno pre iš evalno
mo , ki je bogato izpri ana tudi v drugih delih Pisma.
Vzemimo za primer spet:
Knjigo modrosti 5, 21-23
21 Švigale bodo natan no naperjene puš ice bliskov,
kakor z uslo enega loka oblakov bodo letele v cilj.
22 Metalni stroj bo bruhal razjarjeno to o,
proti njim bodo pobesnele morske vode
in reke bodo preplavljale brez usmiljenja.
23 Proti njim se bo dvignil silen piš
in jih odpihnil kakor vihar.
Nepostavnost bo povzro ila opustošenje vsega sveta,
hudodelstvo bo prevrnilo prestole mogo nežev.
Vihar, orkani...so torej simboli Božanske slave, ki drobi vse, kar je na zemlji prividno
veli astno in se Bogu upira; se upira Jahvejevemu ljudstvu in mu kali mir. Psalm 29 je prava
himna Bogu v veli astni orkestraciji viharja.
Tudi v loveku tak vihar dejansko pomeni odhod duha proti neslutenemu, pretresljivemu in
nemirnemu, zato ni udno, e tu vstajajo simboli vertikalne osi, dviganja v ljubezni in njeni
nezamejljivosti. Ljubezen v tem smislu je vedno duh Duha in Božanske mo i.
Dinamika psalmov nam po viharju, pišu, strelah, Božanski pojavi nad vodami kaže tudi »vode
zgoraj«, to je oblake, »uslo en lok oblakov«.
The Myth of the Slaying of the Dragon Iluyankas by the Storm-God (Hittite)
The Sacred Marriage of the Storm-God and Ashertu (Hittite) .
115
Na kaj drugega bi se nanašala kot na BOŽJE IME, (šem) ki odzvanja v SVETOSTI (kabod), MO I in
LEPOTI.
53
Simbol oblaka seveda v svoji simboliki prevzema razli ne pojavne forme. Pretresljiva je zlasti
njegova mnogoobli nost, ki se stalno spreminja, zato je vedno epifanija in del kozmi nega
scenarija velikih dogajanj. »In oblak ga jim je vzel ispred o i« - kot nekakšen dinami en
konec za drugi prihod Kristusov. Enako tudi francoski pesnik Baudelaire: »Rad imam oblake,
oblake ki odhajajo...tja dol, tja ez... ti udežni oblaki.«
V sanskrtu oblak pomeni »ghana« in pomeni prvobitni embrion vsega. V Islamu pa pomeni
nespoznatnost Alaha – pred objavo Mohamedu. Je hkrati tisti skrivnostni velum vsega, kar
vemo in spoznamo, da bi mogli spri o izrazite jasnine spoznanja še mogli obstati. Zato
zakriva Božansko, da bi mi ne umrli.
Božansko sporo ilo oblakov je tudi sporo ilo Božjega vzrokovanja – oblaki so znanilci
rodovitnega dežja...116 in imajo zato tesno povezavo s preroki in preroštvom (Elija). Seveda
jih v grških mitih sre amo v ve ji sproš enosti, ki sega vse tja do humorja in gest, ki nas silijo
k nasmehu.117
Simbol glasu je postavljen nasproti cedram libanonskim. Cedre so simbol vzvišenosti in
ponosa, vendar pripadajo zemeljskim simbolov, vendar simbol gore nekako organsko
nadvladuje simbol cedre – kajti pred silnim Bogom »cel libanon poskakuje kakor teli ek«;
kaj bi torej vzvišenost in ponos cedre pred vzvišenostjo Boga. Boga se ne da primerjati z
ni emer, kar je ustvarjenega. Vsa simbolika z vsemi grozljivimi mo mi narave odstira ta
zadnji zven – GLASU Božjega.
In še zanimivo vprašanje Je Psalm 29 izklju no hebrejski?
Vprašujemo se, ali je Psalm 29 isto originalen hebrejski Psalm ali pa je samo predelava
nekega starejšega besedila? Mnogi specialisti118 se strinjajo, da ga je mogo e primerjati z
razli nimi orientalskimi vzporednicami Sumercev, Akadcev119, Babiloncev..., ki so
116
Zna ilnost simbolov je njihova ambivalenca; grozljivost vode v poplavi, in rodovitnost vode (v obliki rose in
dežja) v puš avi. Skupine simbolov: vihar, oblak, voda, razjarjene vode..., vode, ki nosijo rodovitnost... so torej
tiste skupine, ki so privzete in njihove notranje povezanosti in pove ujejo njihovo mo .
117
Tu arobni oblak (Nefela), ki je bil na zunaj podoben Heri, s katerim se je poigral Zevs, da bi odvrnil
libidozne želje Iksija. Iz zveze Nefele in Iksiona so se rodili Kentavri. Prav tako vemo, da je slovita Helena
zaradi katere je bila trojanska vojna in v katero je bil zaljubljen Paris, je bila samo obla ni privid po zaslugi in
veš ini arodeja Proteja.
Znamenita orfi na verovanja uporabljajo simbol oblaka (Aristofanes) tako kot simbol vode, kot presentacijo
plodnosti. To so h ere Oceana, ki so živele ob izvirih in na oto jih. Oblak je simbol tiste preobrazbe, ki jo lahko
vseskozi spremljamo.
118
Alster, Bendt, "A Sumerian Poem about Early Rulers", Acta Sumerologica 8 (1986), 1-11: score
transliteration, translation, commentary
ISTI AVTOR, "The Sumerian Poem of Early Rulers and Related Poems", Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodica 21
(1990), 5-25: score transliteration, translation, commentary (no. 1)
119
Zna ilno je seveda predvsem Hamurabijevo obdobje, ki nam je znan predvsem iz tako imenovanega
Hamurabijevega zakonika in zapisaapodikti nega in kazuisti nega prava, na kamnu, ki ga hranijo v Parizu.
Angleški vir to visoko kulturno obdobje na kratko takole ozna uje: The Sumerian people gradually began to
amalgamate with the Akkadians (c. 2745), a tribe that dwelt at the confluence of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers.
It was not the Akkadians that were destined to become the predominant people, however, but the Semites. One
of the Semites succeeded in converting a rural village, Babylon, into a centre of power and, almost unopposed, in
founding a dynasty. This man was Hamurabi.
There was an impressive growth of commercial activity from as early as the First Dynasty at Babylon, and
during the reign of Hamurabi (1792-1750) the reforming king transformed the small states of the Sumerians and
Akkadians into a single empire. Babylon evolved into the metropolis of the empire and Hamurabi demonstrated
his generosity by respecting the cultural traditions of the other cities, such as Sippar, with its impressive libraries,
54
hebrejskemu piscu poznane. s tem v zvezi navajajo predvsem Himno Marduku120. Seveda je v
hebrejskem besedilu samo JAHVE Bog in Gospod.
Psalm 91121
1 Tisti,
ki stanuje v skrivališ u Najvišjega,
ki preno uje v senci Mogo nega,
2 pravi GOSPODU: »Moje zato iš e in moja trdnjava,
thereby incorporating an intellectual tradition that at the same time gave birth to further creations. The grandiose
religious ceremonies held in the monumental temple of Marduk inspired works of a secular and religious
content, such as the Hymn of Marduk and the Creation. These exercised a great influence on the intellectual and
spiritual life of the Babylonians and were widely read, copied, annotated and used as teaching materials.
120
Originalno besedilo te Himne je tole:
1dmarduk he2-til3-e
2X-la he2-ri-ib-si-si
3nam-til3-zu dmarduk he2-eb2-be2
4nam-til3-la-zu he2-ri-ib-sud-dam
5[ud] /du\-ru-ce3 he2-ri-ib-tuku-a
6he2-til3-la
7he2-silim-ma
8gi16-sa-ac he2-a
9jic-cub-ba-zu nam-til3-la he2-a
10nam-til3 cag4 dug3-ga ha-la-zu he2-a
11ud nu2-a ma-mu2-zu he2-en-sag9
12zig3-ga-am3 inim-jar-zu he2-en-sag9
13ki jiri3 gub-ba-zu silim-ma he2-ni-ib2-gen6
14/til3\-la lugal-ju10 igi an-ne2 a-a dijir-re-e-ne-ke4 sag9-ga
15[X] lugal-zu kalam-ma he2-ri-ib-il2?-e
16[X] X jicgu-za-zu su3-u4-ra2-ce3 hu-mu-un-X X
17/KA?\ X /gi16\-sa-ac he2-a
18<jic-cub-ba-zu nam-til3-la he2-a>
19da-a KA nam-til3-la X [...] a2-zu [...]
20jic DUG.LAGAB? a-ra2 gub-ba jic KA jic /lu\ [...]
21dijir u2 gu7-am3 a silim (1 ms. has instead: a naj-naj) X til3-la ud su3-ra2 jic-cub-ba-zu ja2-ja2
22ka-ta gub-ba nam-til3 ha-ba-rig7
23he2-til3-la he2-silim-ma gi16-sa-ac he2-a
24jic-cub-ba-zu nam-til3-la he2-a
25nam-til3 cag4 dug3-ga ha-la-zu he2-a
26ud nu2-a ma-mu2-zu he2-en-sag9
27zig3-ga-am3 inim-jar-zu he2-en-sag9
28ki jiri3 gub-ba-zu silim-ma he2-ni-ib2-/gen6\
29ud du-ru-ce3 he2-til3 X [...]
Strokovni angleški prevod te Himne:
1-13May Marduk grant life! May he make your ...... full! May Marduk decree life for you! May he prolong your
life, and may he let you keep it for everlasting days! May you live, and may you have peace! May it last forever!
May life be your lot, and may a life of contentment be your share! When you lie down to sleep, may your dreams
be propitious, and when you rise, may your omens be favourable! Wherever you walk, may you be established in
peace!
14-29May the life of my king be pleasant in the eyes of An, father of the gods! May he let you wear your royal
...... in the Land! May your ...... throne be ...... until distant days! ......, may it last forever, and may life be your
lot! May Aya ...... life, ...... your strength!
(ena vrstica ni jasna)
May it be your lot to be a god, eating food and ...... peaceful water (1 ms. has instead: drinking water ...... ) of
long life! May a divine command bestow life on you! May you live, and may you have peace! May it last forever
and may life be your lot! May a life of contentment be your share! When you lie down to sleep, may your
dreams be propitious, and when you rise, may your omens be favourable! Wherever you walk, may you be
established in peace! May you live for everlasting days ......!
121
Psalm 91 je psalm zaupanja v obliki dialoga med vernikom (v. 1–2), duhovnikom (v. 3–13) in Bogom (v.
14–16). Psalmista prežema gotovost v Božje odrešenje in zmago nad vsemi silami zla.
55
moj Bog, ki vanj zaupam.«
3 Zares, on te bo rešil iz pti arjeve zanke,
pred pogubno kugo.
4 S svojimi krili te pokrije,
pod njegove peruti se zate eš;
š it in oklep sta njegova zvestoba.
5 Ne boš se bal no ne strahote,
ne puš ice, ki leti podnevi,
6 tudi ne kuge, ki hodi v temi,
ne žela, ki pustoši opoldne.
7 Naj
jih pade tiso na tvoji strani,
deset tiso na tvoji desnici,
tebi se to ne bo približalo.
8 Samo s svojimi o mi boš gledal,
pa boš videl pla ilo krivi nikov.
9 Zares, ti, GOSPOD, si moje zato iš e,
Najvišjega si postavil za svoje prebivališ e;
10 ne bo te zadela nesre a,
udarec se ne bo približal tvojemu šotoru.
11 Zakaj
svojim angelom bo zate zapovedal,
naj te varujejo na vseh tvojih potih.
12 Na rokah te bodo nosili,
da z nogo ne zadeneš ob kamen.
13 ez leva in gada boš stopal,
poteptal boš mladega leva in morsko pošast.
14 Ker mi je vdan, ga ho em osvoboditi,
branil ga bom, ker spoznava moje ime.
15 Kli e me, pa ga uslišim,
z njim sem, ko je v stiski,
rešim ga in mu izkažem ast.
16 Z dolgostjo dni ga nasitim,
pokazal mu bom svoje rešenje.
Ps 91
+5
>*
: !" #5
*
G" '
K # &(!)(G%) , -- )
+*"-%='
+ *
( ':) # (
< %2)
9! # G%4,.>-- % ,
-+ )*J( 0%) #
+
L!&( '=H) #
? ( -
1 O thou that dwellest in the covert of the Most High,
and abidest in the shadow of the Almighty;
2 I will say of the LORD, who is my refuge and my
fortress, my God, in whom I trust,
3 That He will deliver thee from the snare of the
fowler, and from the noisome pestilence.
G * ' " 4 He will cover thee with His pinions, and under His
wings shalt thou take refuge; His truth is a shield and a
+*4) %G, buckler.
&%2)
-
. " ':)
5 Thou shalt not be afraid of the terror by night, nor of
the arrow that flieth by day;
6 Of the pestilence that walketh in darkness, nor of the
destruction that wasteth at noonday.
56
3 >)) '' (
--J
+
4
)F
; , #="
- 6"
> "<
8 Only with thine eyes shalt thou behold, and see the
recompense of the wicked.
9; + LC"
1>, #
9 For thou hast made the LORD who is my refuge,
even the Most High, thy habitation.
10 There shall no evil befall thee, neither shall any
plague come nigh thy tent.
11 For He will give His angels charge over thee, to
# F- (! ,6C ) keep thee in all thy ways.
+ 6:
)
2--
12 They shall bear thee upon their hands, lest
thou dash thy foot against a stone.
&4 5., % -
13 Thou shalt tread upon the lion and asp; the
young lion and the serpent shalt thou trample
under feet.
+ 15
' "J/4-5
2 3 >(M
+59 , .-G ) 4 #
&- - ('/7
7 A thousand may fall at Thy side, and ten thousand at
Thy right hand; it shall not come nigh thee.
# G%) , 4 - -
+ >*)4)7 5
*
' <-
:?) 2
+ /
14 'Because he hath set his love upon Me,
#(=F. ,< % ' therefore
will I deliver him; I will set him on
+)
high, because he hath known My name.
15 He shall call upon Me, and I will answer
# !' 6>C-*
8 --(>K , > <
+(&"6 ,(!F% him; I will be with him in trouble; I will
rescue him, and bring him to honour.
+
( "(
, #( "7
)
16 With long life will I satisfy him, and make
Him to behold My salvation.' {P}
___________________________________________________________________________
Ta psalm zaupanja v obliki duhovnega dialoga, v loveku utrjuje tisto osnovno duhovno držo,
ki je dejansko tudi osnovna vera, da bodo namre sile zla (neko ) premagane. Vsa simbolna
dinamika to vero podpira in duhovno držo krepi na bivanjski ravni. Zaupanje Bogu je v tem
Psalmu tako mo no, da ga moremo primerjati (v tem pogledu) le še s Psalmom 46, vendar je
tam v ospredju simbolne dramati nosti ljudstvo, tu pa posameznik. Dialoška oblika (govor
loveka, govor Boga...) privede do Božjega zagotovila v vrsticah 14-16: 14 »Ker mi je vdan,
ga ho em osvoboditi, / branil ga bom, ker spoznava moje ime. / 15 Kli e me, pa ga uslišim,
z njim sem, ko je v stiski, / rešim ga in mu izkažem ast. / 16 Z dolgostjo dni ga nasitim, /
pokazal mu bom svoje rešenje.«
Vsebinsko torej štejemo med Psalme zaupanja, eprav njegova oblika sama ni isto v skladu s
to literarno obliko; soroden je s Knjigo Modrosti in je po vsem videzu nastal v obdobju po
Izgnanstvu.
Simboli ki se vrste so: zavetje (zato iš e), senca, trdnjava. Tem nekako nasprotni so simboli,
ki predstavljajo vso tesnobo in zlo, ki lahko loveka zadene, (demonske mo i, sovražne
spletke, bolezni) zato nokturni simbol no i in njegovo protivje, dan. Zna ilna rešitev zavesti
je seveda izražena povsem na starozavezen na in: »Z dolgim življenjem ga nasitim« - to je
57
nenakšno znamenje rešenja, (hebrejsko yešu'ah)122 – ki je osrednja beseda Psalmov znamenje
za tisto vdanost, »ki visi na Bogu«, ki se naslanja na Boga in Boga »spoznava«. Izraz je tako
biološki, da pomeni spojitev moža in žene v spolnem dejanju – v isti intenziteti pa pomeni
tudi »spoznanje Boga po imenu«.
Skrivnost tega Psalma pa je seveda svobodnost Božjega ravnanja. Šele pogled nanjo nam
more predo iti lovekovo bivanjsko ujetost, ki je seveda tudi izpostavitev preizkušnjam,
v asih do zadnjih meja. V teh zadnjih mejah pa je Božja prisotnost in njegova rešitev
pravzaprav najvidnejša, kajti tu ne drži in ne vzdrži isto ni drugega kot ona sama. Božja
prisotnost tukaj bliska v svoji istini in milostnost Božjega yešu'ah je ista in povsem
podarjena milostnost. In ravno ta najvišji domet je v svetem tekstu domet simbolnega.
Metafori ni123 domet pa nam je razviden iz Jezusovega govora (Jn, 16, 32 sl.): »Glejte, pride
ura in je že zdaj, ko se boste razkropili vsak na svoje in me pustili samega. Vendar nisem sam,
kajti O e je z menoj. To pa vam povem, da boste imeli mir v meni, kajti na tem svetu boste
padali v stiske, vendar zaupajte, jaz sem ta svet premagal«
Tako sem prišel do konca.
Poskušal sem povedati vse kar se da v tako kratkem predavanju in kljub vsem velikim
problemom na katere ob takih po etjih naletimo, hotel in želel biti im bolj razumljiv kromen
in enostaven.
Za konec - obeti
Podal sem torej nekaj kratkih ilustracij prisotnosti univerzalne simbolne dejavnosti v Psalmih. Gre res za ilustracijo, kajti še
podrobnejša analiza bi v marsi em presegla okvire enega predavanja in verjetno tudi možnosti, da bi me, moji dragi
poslušalci še vedno dovolj dobro in v celoti razumeli. Zavedam se namre , da pri tako dolgem in težkem predavanju vaša
pozornost pada in je spodobnost dojemanja zato zmanjšana. Vendar, ni hudega! Predavanje bom dal na našo znano
župnijsko medmrežno stran in tam ga boste lahko študirali vsi, ki si boste to želeli. In tako: volk sit in koza cela.
Hvala vam za obisk. Hvala za pozornost!
OAMDG!
122
Beseda ima v obdobju po izgnanstvu tudi eshatološki pomen.
Mo metafore v besedilu Biblije je izjemno dobro moderno osvetlil zlasti Paul Ricoeur, ki sem ga navajal.
Poleg navedenega dela The Great Code (Northrop Frye), je za vsako spogledovanje z bibli nim besedilom
potrebno poznati sodobno simboliko na tem podro ju in Ricoeurjevo delo Matafora viva, ki sem ga že navedel.
123

1 Dr. Stanislav Matičič Semantika in simbolika

Transcription

Similar documents

TB Planina

novac kralja stefana uroša iii dečanskog (1321-1331)

Glas Slovenije oktober 1999 - Sticisce avstralskih Slovencev

dmp model - Udruženje banaka Srbije

Večernji program - Dubrovačke ljetne igre

novac kralja vukašina mrnjavčevića (1365-1371)

1. PDF dokument

ivan koÊari zasluÊuje svoju sre u ivan koÊari deserves his happiness

PDF formatu - Pripreme za drÅ¾avnu maturu | Algebra

the jungle boy - English student theatre

GrIGOFleX - Grigolin