![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
wolven7Ayreon - Age Of Shadows--- It could rightly be said that what I engage in is a process of personal exegesis. It's long, tedious, ridiculously close scrutiny to the nature of myself and my interactions with others and to anyone not engaged in it, it is very likely pointless.
Speaking of exegesis, I realised today-- and not for the first time-- that the process of Christian interpretational exegesis and canonical expansion is almost precisely the same as that of the Jewish Talmudic Midrash (unsurprisingly), but it is far less self-aware. It is this lack of self-consciousness which leads to so much in-fighting, so much very divisive splintering. Judaism sees itself as revealed, handed down, true, but the word of god is there to be interpreted, to be understood in a new light as necessary, as time goes on. I think this awareness allows for less friction between interpretations than is present in the Christian enterprise.
Ayreon - Comatose--- Anyway, what lead me to this-- in my usual meandering style-- is that I was thinking earlier about the fact that though the Christian interpretational lens is a severely limiting one (to say the least), it often affords a perspective that is illuminating. For instance, I often hark back to the model of the Seven Deadly Sins (which is not precisely canonical, but is a part of the Tradition, hence the above), and this is because I use the Satan archetype. (Ayreon - Liquid Eternity). The Satan archetype is, itself, one that's frought with all kinds of Alter connotations, including the Promethean, the Angelic, the "Evil," the Animistic, the Base, the Natural, the Demonic (daimonaic), and when we begin to (unthinkingly) conflate these things into a single archetype, as we do with the figure of the Satan, then it serves us well to occasionally untangle these threads and figure out what we're actually talking about, what we're dealing with, which particular facet is facing the light, at a given time. So, the Seven Deadly Sins.
It's pretty well accepted that the Adversary archetype holds the sin of Pride as primary, often cast as hubris, or the arrogance of thinking that one knows better than the gods. But this isn't all, and it can't be, because the Adversary is not only that which tests us, but that which stands counter to God, so the Adversary has to embody all of the sins, in the same way that God is the ultimate source and expression of all the Virtues. Now, to be fair, I think that's crap, but only because of the inability of and/or unwillingness of most who believe in this system to accept the contradictory nature of the completeness of infinity. (Ayreon - Connect The Dots). But that's a conversation for another time. Suffice it to say that if you are going to accept the role of the Adversary, you will have to find your primary sin, your Ultimate Vice, and how to look at and encompass and embody all of the others, through that lens.
Well you don't "have" to, but it might help.
I used to consider my primary to be Wrath, then Pride, then Lust, but I think it's changed, recently. I think that, in the first place, it's less a linear or ordered thing, and in the second the components have become more Pride, Greed, and Lust (Wrath is the canvas on which my world is painted :P). Anyway.
These are the idle thoughts I have.
I think that thinking of my more "base" drives this way sometimes allows a more easily understandable rubric. Not always. Sometimes I need something else. Some days I need to be the devil.
Anyway, how are you?
Speaking of exegesis, I realised today-- and not for the first time-- that the process of Christian interpretational exegesis and canonical expansion is almost precisely the same as that of the Jewish Talmudic Midrash (unsurprisingly), but it is far less self-aware. It is this lack of self-consciousness which leads to so much in-fighting, so much very divisive splintering. Judaism sees itself as revealed, handed down, true, but the word of god is there to be interpreted, to be understood in a new light as necessary, as time goes on. I think this awareness allows for less friction between interpretations than is present in the Christian enterprise.
Ayreon - Comatose--- Anyway, what lead me to this-- in my usual meandering style-- is that I was thinking earlier about the fact that though the Christian interpretational lens is a severely limiting one (to say the least), it often affords a perspective that is illuminating. For instance, I often hark back to the model of the Seven Deadly Sins (which is not precisely canonical, but is a part of the Tradition, hence the above), and this is because I use the Satan archetype. (Ayreon - Liquid Eternity). The Satan archetype is, itself, one that's frought with all kinds of Alter connotations, including the Promethean, the Angelic, the "Evil," the Animistic, the Base, the Natural, the Demonic (daimonaic), and when we begin to (unthinkingly) conflate these things into a single archetype, as we do with the figure of the Satan, then it serves us well to occasionally untangle these threads and figure out what we're actually talking about, what we're dealing with, which particular facet is facing the light, at a given time. So, the Seven Deadly Sins.
It's pretty well accepted that the Adversary archetype holds the sin of Pride as primary, often cast as hubris, or the arrogance of thinking that one knows better than the gods. But this isn't all, and it can't be, because the Adversary is not only that which tests us, but that which stands counter to God, so the Adversary has to embody all of the sins, in the same way that God is the ultimate source and expression of all the Virtues. Now, to be fair, I think that's crap, but only because of the inability of and/or unwillingness of most who believe in this system to accept the contradictory nature of the completeness of infinity. (Ayreon - Connect The Dots). But that's a conversation for another time. Suffice it to say that if you are going to accept the role of the Adversary, you will have to find your primary sin, your Ultimate Vice, and how to look at and encompass and embody all of the others, through that lens.
Well you don't "have" to, but it might help.
I used to consider my primary to be Wrath, then Pride, then Lust, but I think it's changed, recently. I think that, in the first place, it's less a linear or ordered thing, and in the second the components have become more Pride, Greed, and Lust (Wrath is the canvas on which my world is painted :P). Anyway.
These are the idle thoughts I have.
I think that thinking of my more "base" drives this way sometimes allows a more easily understandable rubric. Not always. Sometimes I need something else. Some days I need to be the devil.
Anyway, how are you?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-05-30 03:52 am (UTC)I'm not touching my eyes or anywhere else sensitive for a while.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-30 04:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-31 01:37 pm (UTC)I swear, I loved making them but the next time I do anything jalapeño or hotter I'm wearing rubber gloves.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-30 05:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-30 05:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-31 01:38 pm (UTC)