TOPOI – Dahlem Seminar for the History of Ancient Sciences Vol. II
Klaus Geus and Mark Geller (eds.)
2014
Esoteric Knowledge in Antiquity– SOME THOUGHTS
Mark Geller & Klaus Geus
Freie Universität Berlin
confrontation of the same idea between disciplines. A case in point is the concept of ‘esoteric
knowledge’, to which the present collection of articles is devoted, which will trace the framework of esoteric knowledge from Babylonia to Greece and into Christian thought, highlighting similarities and differences within each episteme. The journey is rather crooked and full of potholes.
Moreover, the expression ‘esoteric’ is used today rather indiscriminately. Within the
category of ‘esoteric knowledge’ one understands a variety of related expressions, such as
‘mystical’ or ‘occult’, as well as the more concrete ‘absolute’ or ‘elevated’ knowledge, which
can also be considered as ‘hidden’, ‘secret’, or ‘inaccessible’, and even ‘fanciful’ or carried
away. The confused pattern of such definitions advocates a look at the historical development
this concept.
The term ‘esoteric’ originates from the Greek for ‘inner’, not however with the sense
of ‘psychic’, ‘spiritual’, or ‘mystical’, but with a purely local meaning of being ‘further within’ something. The antonym is ‘exoteric’, namely ‘external’. There is no corresponding terminology in Babylonia, although the concept of knowledge exclusively reserved for scholars
increasingly appeared in colophons of cuneiform tablets emanating from the scribal academies and royal libraries, such as that of Assurbanipal of Nineveh (mid 7th century BCE).
These colophons make the matter quite explicit: revealing the contents of a particular academic tablet to someone uninitiated (literally ‘not knowledgeable’) is a taboo of a god. But what
kind of composition contains such hidden (or esoteric) knowledge?
This question is not easy to answer. On one hand there are neither terms for or any textual evidence for ‘esoteric’ versus ‘exoteric’ knowledge, since neither category is defined, although there is an implicit assumption of ‘insiders’ (lit. mudû ‘learned’) and ‘outsiders’ (lit. la
mudû, ‘not learned’) among possible readers of the tablets. Beyond this crude distinction in
colophons, there are references to secret knowledge or lore often associated with divination,
such as niširti bārûti, ‘secrets of the art of the haruspex’, and such secrets were occasionally
associated with a particular location, namely the bīt mummi. This place was originally the
secluded workshop in a temple where idols were either repaired or manufactured, accessible
only by priests skilled in this type of sensitive work, and even if only a metaphor, the bīt
mummi clearly distinguishes between insiders and outsiders.
In fact, it was likely that all disciplines maintained this distinction between those who
were mudû and la mudû, between initiated and uninitiated, in a particular discipline. What is
not clear is whether these terms could refer to other scribes or scholars not trained in a specific discipline (e.g. astronomy/ astrology, medicine, liturgy), or whether the phrase was simply meant to exclude anyone who was generally thought to be unschooled. We have little information about any serious rivalry or competition between scribal academies, either in different cities or temples, or even between scribes who were experts in specific areas of knowledge. Academically animosities probably existed then as it does now, but clear statements of such are hard to find.
There are Sumerian and Akkadian compositions from scribal academies which appear
to reflect esoteric or mystical knowledge, on a par with later Kabbalistic writings, and these
are obvious candidates for defining a category of esoteric texts; they remain virtually impossible to comprehend, but they refer to themes such as the Chariot of Marduk which remarkably reflect something of the Merkavah Mysticism of medieval Jewish texts. Such texts are
exceptional and do not represent the full range of academic compositions most often prohibited to the uninitiated. As is so often the case in Mesopotamia, we are not guided by any ancient secondary literature or philosophical treatises, which would help pave the way for us to
comprehend ancient Sumerian and Akkadian scholarly writings; the commentary texts which
we have (also ‘esoteric’) are themselves frustratingly cryptic and abbreviated.
Nevertheless, the contrast between Babylonian and Greek concepts of what constitutes
such knowledge is rather revealing. The Greek expressions for esoteric and exoteric were
mostly employed in reference to ancient mystery cults, such as the Eleusinian mysteries or
Mithra-cults, in which one must first be ‘consecrated’ in a special ceremony and afterwards is
prohibited to reveal any of the knowledge acquired during the initiation, under pain of death.
This constitutes ‘secret knowledge’ in a real way.
From ancient mystery cults, the concepts of esoteric and exoteric knowledge spread to
Greek philosophical schools. Exactly in the same way that initiation was instituted among
these cults which mandated a special, secret kind of knowledge, so Greek philosophical
schools of Pythagoras and Plato conveyed special kinds of knowledge and teachings among
their closest disciples which were not to be communicated to others. These privileged students
Esoteric Knowledge in Antiquity were known as ‘Esotericists’, while all those beyond the immediate circle of the initiated were known as ‘Exotericists’; Pythagoreans also recognised the esoteric categories of mathematics and acousmatics.
Modern usage has reversed these relationships, at least as far as the value of knowledge is concerned, since in contemporary language ‘esoteric’ almost exclusively reflects fanciful and speculative knowledge. We must therefore distinguish between original ancient concepts in which ‘esoteric’ implies higher, deeper, and even better knowledge, in contrast to today’s understanding of esoteric as secret, marginal, and relatively worthless knowledge.
These concepts of esoteric and exoteric have undergone a profound change of perspective in
the course of the history of these terms.
Science per se is perceived as a set of rules derived from abstract propositions. Beginning with empirical observation, carried out under specific conditions, scientists propose
causal relationships, e.g. if someone does A, then B will result. These kinds of causal relationships may also offered by priests and shamans, by sticking needles into a voodoo doll or tossing fingernails into a fire in order to cause harm to one’s enemies or rivals, or alternatively if
an astrologer associates events in a person’s life with the sun’s progress through the Zodiac.
On the other hand, a Christian believer might see miracles in a similar light, as expressions of
some higher or divinely inspired knowledge, which would allow healing to take place at the
mere touch or presence of a famous personage or saint, such as Simeon Stylites.
The question is how to balance such claims within the various frameworks of ancient thought. Here distinctions can be made between different types of healing or magical events, such as healing
through technical rituals, recitations of incantations, or therapeutic prescriptions (all esoteric
knowledge of sorts), verses the direct inspirational healing of a famous wonderworker, such
as Apollonius of Tyana.
How, in such cases, can we distinguish between esoteric and exoteric knowledge? One criterion would be simply to ask how well informed we are about those ancient techniques which could be considered esoteric. One good example, black magic (mentioned above), is clearly a type of illicit knowledge not shared by everyone except those trained in it, and in fact few textbooks of black magic are known from antiquity; mostly we know how to defend against witchcraft rather than actually employ it. Within the pagan world, the boundaries between the various kinds of esoteric and exoteric knowledge remain somewhat confused.
In the same way that Babylonian divination was labelled as niṣirti bārûti, ‘secrets of
the art of the haruspex’ (see above), the art of dream interpretation was a widely known and
practiced secret techne in the ancient world, best known through the writings of Artemidorus.
It is difficult to know how this knowledge actually operated and whether dreams reflected
actual realities or were limited to flights of imagination. It seems clear, however, that dreams
were firmly rooted in the geography of everyday life and reflected the normal landscapes of
human life, although within a theoretical mantic framework aimed at predicting the future.
Nevertheless, the associations between visions and dreams and their interpretations constitute
another grey area of esoteric knowledge, in which the associative thought processes which
produce the predictions are never actually expounded or even discussed in ancient texts, but
are assumed to be the private knowledge of professional dream interpreters.
With the advent of Christianity, the situation changes, since to some extent the distinction between religious and secular knowledge becomes sharper; the former is based upon faith
and belief, while the latter is perceived as being more scientific and rational. This brings us
back to schooling and the tensions between studies of rhetoric, philosophy, and logic within
the secular curriculum contrasted with religious training, which emphasised acceptance of
dogma and homilies, and faith-based teachings. Without doubt, however, is the picture of insiders and outsiders, ie. those who either accept or fail to accept Christian faith as part of their
world view and approach to ‘true’ knowledge.
This brings us into the murky world of the Hermetica and Gnostic wisdom, which contrasts with the philosophical views of philosophers devoted to discovering the laws of nature.
The boundaries are not always as clear as one might think, since certain kinds of questions
(eg. the composition and mortality of the soul) could be debated universally among all brands
of scholarship. There is also little doubt that Platonic-style philosophy and Aristotelian logic
was also applied to Gnostic wisdom, which itself was dedicated to the kind of secret knowledge which would lead to salvation and reward in the afterlife. Nevertheless, a basic difference between philosophy and gnostic thought was the element of secrecy and whether relevant ideas could be openly discussed and debated, or were these ideas only available to an inner circle of subscribers and co-believers. It is this characteristic of secrecy, of Geheimwissen, which probably reflects the most profound differences between esoteric and exoteric knowledge.
CONTENT
Chapter 1: Esoteric Knowledge in Antiquity – Some Thoughts
Mark Geller & Klaus Geus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Chapter 2: Secret of Extispicy Revealed
Netanel Anor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Chapter 3: Scenes with Two Bes Figures from Nimrudand the Second Step of Bes
Toward Globalisation
Adrienn Orosz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Chapter 4: Near Eastern origins of Graeco-Egyptian Alchemy
Matteo Martelli / Maddalena Rumor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Chapter 5: Traum und Raum in den Onesikritika des Artemidoros von Daldis
Gregor Weber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Chapter 6: On the Use and Abuse of Philosophy for Life: John Chrysostom’s
Paradoxical View of Knowledge
Jan R. Stenger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Chapter 7: Esoterisches Wissen im Platonismus und in der christlichen Gnosis
Christoph Markschies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Chapter 8: Priesterliches Kultwissen in den philensischen Graffiti des 4. und 5.
Jahrhunderts n. Chr.
Jan Moje . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Chapter 9: Ein syrischer Hermes? Anmerkungen zu esoterischen Traditionen im
syrischen Medizinbuch
Stefanie Rudolf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
Chapter 10: Self-Knowledge, Illumination and Natural Magic: Some Notes on Pico
della Mirandola’s Esotericism and Its Ancient Sources
Adrian Pirtea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
About the Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
TOPOI – Dahlem Seminar for the History of Ancient Sciences
The Dahlem Seminar for the History of Ancient Sciences is an initiative resulting from
cooperation between the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Berlin, and the Topoi
Excellence Cluster. Future events are intended to foster stronger links between scholars at the
Max Planck Institute, Freie Universität and Humboldt Universität, under the overall aegis of
the Topoi Excellence Cluster. The Dahlem Seminar for the History of Ancient Sciences, under
the direction of Klaus Geus and Mark Geller, organises an annual colloquium series on various
innovative themes in ancient scholarship and knowledge transfer.
No comments:
Post a Comment