A Similar Issue in the Work of Gregory of Nyssa

~*~



when
the human receptacle
is described allegorically in terms of sexuality
it has to be represented
as female



it is no accident
that in his first work On Virginity
and in one of his last
the great Commentary on the Song of Songs
Gregory chooses feminine language
to speak of the human person
especially in describing our releations
with "G*D"
which for him {HER?} are
the definitive aspect of human identity
and existence ...

in the treatise
On Those Who Have Fallen Asleep
he speculates that in the resurrection human reproductive faculties
may be transformed into a capacity to become impregnated
with life from 'g*d'
and bring forth various forms of goodness
from within oneself

THIS suggests
that although human persons can be either male of female
in this world and will be neither male nor female
in the next
on a different level they ALL relate to g*d
in a female way
as bride to
Bridegroom


~*~


my
perhaps too bold suggestion is
that our midrashic text is related to the same paradox
of mystical experience

circumcision
is understood by the midrash text
as feminizing the male
THUS making him open to receive the 'Divine speech
and vision' of "G*D"

my
interpretation of this midrash
is that of medieval mystics:

"RAV YOSE said,
WHY is it written, 'And the Lord will pass over the door [literally opening]'
[EX 12:23]? ...
'Over the opening,'
read it literally as 'opening'!
That is,
the opening of the body.
And what is the opening of the body?
That is the circumcision."

although this text
is a pseudepigraph of the thirteenth century
I am suggesting that the idea is already embryonic in the midrashic text
in which circumcised men
are "daughters"

the mystic pseudepigraph
would then be making explicit that which is implicit
in the earlier formation

THUS
we have indeed evidence
for the possibility of a jewish {AND jewish-christian} view
that regarded circumcision as necessary preparation for experiencing
the Spirit

NOTE once more
HOW that view is grounded precisely
in the flesh

"From my flesh [my circumcised penis] I will see "G*D."

were such
a view current
among Paul's opponents in Galatia
we would easily understand
his charge,
"Having begun in the spirit,
are you NOW finishing up
in the flesh?"


~*~


THE
reason
that this suggestion must be very tentative is that
as far as I know
the only evidence for such a doctrine is post-Pauline
and therefor could very well be interpreted
as a response
to Paul

nevertheless
it remains very attractive to me to speculate
that SUCH a doctrine already existed amonf the "Jews"
and THUS the Judaeo-Christians
fot THEN
Paul's argument here
has enormous
FORCE

"They are telling you
that ONLY the circumcised can see "G*D",
but you yourselves have already experienced visual experiences
in {the} Holy Spirit
SO their claim is shown
to be a lie!
Moreover,
since the spirit is higher than the flesh,
and you have already jumped (from the very beginning) to that level,
will you NOW return to the lower level
of the flesh?"

another possibility is
that paul is simply contrasting two forms of initiation as such:
the higher one, baptism, which is in the spirit,
and the lower one, circumcision,
which is in the flesh

IT
may even be that Paul's crucial flesh ~ spirit dyad
is initially generated by this very
opposition


IN ANY CASE,
it enters into a very rich texture of associations and meaning
in his thought that go FAR beyond
the moment.


ONE WAY of saying this - and of seeing it -
would be to understand this fundamental opposition as reproduced
entirely at every moment in his discourse,
as ITS foundational, structuring,
generating "KEY" symbol.


~verliefd~
engel


17 jun 2005 - bewerkt op 04 mrt 2008 - meld ongepast verhaal
Weet je zeker dat je dit verhaal wilt rapporteren? Ja | Nee
Profielfoto van Asih
Asih, man, 81 jaar
   
Log in om een reactie te plaatsen.   vorige volgende