3世纪的哲学革新:波菲利的《普罗提尼的生活》与新恺撒里亚的格列高利的《泛埃及经》的论战成分

Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.21638/spbu20.2023.102
R.S. Soloviev
{"title":"3世纪的哲学革新:波菲利的《普罗提尼的生活》与新恺撒里亚的格列高利的《泛埃及经》的论战成分","authors":"R.S. Soloviev","doi":"10.21638/spbu20.2023.102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper offers an analysis of similar and parallel developing projects of creating a true philosophy by the disciples and followers of Origen and Plotinus. Two texts permeated by the eulogy of the scholarch are analysed: Gregory the Wonderworker’s The Address of Thanksgiving to Origen and the Life of Plotinus by Porphyry. Gregory was a student of Origen, while Porphyry attended his school long enough to become familiar with the doctrine, teaching methods and personality of the scholarch. The author establishes the structural, thematic and lexical similarity of both texts. The text by Gregory the Wonderworker, chronologically earlier, was a pushing away point for Porphyry in creating an image of the ideal scholarch in the person of Plotinus. This is confirmed by the structural and lexical contrast in the portrayal of Plotinus in Vita Plotini and Origen in the passage preserved by Proclus (Procl. In Tim. I.63. 29–33). In particular, the negative image of Origen in Vita Plotini 13. 10–17 is echoed by the figure of Thaumasius, dissatisfied with the protracted dispute between Plotinus and Porphyry, which rarely draws the scholars’ attention. Nowhere else mentioned, Thaumasius appears as a marginal figure: either he himself was interested in general statements and wanted to hear Plotinus speaking in the manner of a set treatise (trans. Armstrong), or he wanted Plotinus to “faire une conférence suivie et propre à être écrite” (trans. Bréhier). The author hypothesises that it is not a proper name but a nickname. The author suggests that Thaumasius is not an accidental participant in a specific episode of the Neoplatonists’ school life but the philosophical rival of the Neoplatonists, theologian Origen, ironically presented in an unattractive manner. Thus, the deliberately constructed episode with Plotinus and Thaumasius is a polemical jab at Origen’s followers, who put forward a programme of philosophical renovation alternative to the Platonic, and the very depiction of Plotinus as a ‘divine man’ (θεῖος ἀνήρ) responds to the image of Origen painted by his followers. The supposed allusions in Vita Plotini 13. 5–17 testify to the openness of the Roman Neoplatonic school to the already-formed Christian version of philosophy. For this reason, Porphyry chose to portray a situation in which Plotinus showed attention and patience in interpreting difficult philosophical questions for three days. In contrast, Origen, in a similar situation, showed impatience and irritability.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Philosophical renovation in the 3rd century: The polemical component of Porphyry’s Vita Plotini in relation to Gregory of Neocaesaria’s Oratio Panegyrica\",\"authors\":\"R.S. Soloviev\",\"doi\":\"10.21638/spbu20.2023.102\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper offers an analysis of similar and parallel developing projects of creating a true philosophy by the disciples and followers of Origen and Plotinus. Two texts permeated by the eulogy of the scholarch are analysed: Gregory the Wonderworker’s The Address of Thanksgiving to Origen and the Life of Plotinus by Porphyry. Gregory was a student of Origen, while Porphyry attended his school long enough to become familiar with the doctrine, teaching methods and personality of the scholarch. The author establishes the structural, thematic and lexical similarity of both texts. The text by Gregory the Wonderworker, chronologically earlier, was a pushing away point for Porphyry in creating an image of the ideal scholarch in the person of Plotinus. This is confirmed by the structural and lexical contrast in the portrayal of Plotinus in Vita Plotini and Origen in the passage preserved by Proclus (Procl. In Tim. I.63. 29–33). In particular, the negative image of Origen in Vita Plotini 13. 10–17 is echoed by the figure of Thaumasius, dissatisfied with the protracted dispute between Plotinus and Porphyry, which rarely draws the scholars’ attention. Nowhere else mentioned, Thaumasius appears as a marginal figure: either he himself was interested in general statements and wanted to hear Plotinus speaking in the manner of a set treatise (trans. Armstrong), or he wanted Plotinus to “faire une conférence suivie et propre à être écrite” (trans. Bréhier). The author hypothesises that it is not a proper name but a nickname. The author suggests that Thaumasius is not an accidental participant in a specific episode of the Neoplatonists’ school life but the philosophical rival of the Neoplatonists, theologian Origen, ironically presented in an unattractive manner. Thus, the deliberately constructed episode with Plotinus and Thaumasius is a polemical jab at Origen’s followers, who put forward a programme of philosophical renovation alternative to the Platonic, and the very depiction of Plotinus as a ‘divine man’ (θεῖος ἀνήρ) responds to the image of Origen painted by his followers. The supposed allusions in Vita Plotini 13. 5–17 testify to the openness of the Roman Neoplatonic school to the already-formed Christian version of philosophy. For this reason, Porphyry chose to portray a situation in which Plotinus showed attention and patience in interpreting difficult philosophical questions for three days. In contrast, Origen, in a similar situation, showed impatience and irritability.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu20.2023.102\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu20.2023.102","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文分析了俄利根和普罗提诺的门徒和追随者为创造一种真正的哲学而进行的类似和平行的发展项目。本文分析了两篇充满学者颂词的文本:奇迹工人格列高利的《致俄利根的感恩演说》和波菲利的《普罗提诺的一生》。格列高利是俄利根的学生,而波菲利则在俄利根的学校学习了很长时间,熟悉了俄利根的学说、教学方法和个性。作者建立了两个文本的结构、主位和词汇相似性。《奇迹工人格列高利》的文本,按时间顺序排列,是波菲利创造普罗提诺这个理想学者形象的一个起点。这一点在《普洛提尼的生活》中对普罗提诺的描写和普罗克劳斯保存的段落中的奥利金的结构和词汇对比中得到了证实。蒂姆。I.63。29-33)。特别是在《普洛提尼的生命》13中俄利根的负面形象。10-17与索玛修斯的形象相呼应,他对普罗提诺和波菲利之间旷日持久的争论感到不满,这一点很少引起学者的注意。在其他任何地方都没有提到,索玛修是作为一个边缘人物出现的:要么他自己对一般的陈述感兴趣,想听普罗提诺以一种固定的论文的方式说话。阿姆斯壮),或者他想让普罗提诺“公平地承认一个确定的限期,例如:être限期”(译)。Brehier)。作者推测这不是一个专有名称,而是一个昵称。作者认为,索马修并不是新柏拉图主义者学校生活中一段特定插曲的偶然参与者,而是新柏拉图主义者的哲学对手,神学家奥利金,以一种不吸引人的方式讽刺地出现。因此,与普罗提诺和索马修故意构建的情节是对奥利金追随者的一种论战性的抨击,奥利金追随者提出了一种哲学革新方案来替代柏拉图主义,而把普罗提诺描述为一个“神圣的人”(θε ε ος ν ν ρ)是对他的追随者描绘的奥利金形象的回应。《普洛提尼的生命》中所谓的典故5-17证明了罗马新柏拉图学派对已经形成的基督教哲学的开放性。出于这个原因,波菲利选择描绘这样一个场景:普罗提诺在三天时间里表现出了专注和耐心,解释了困难的哲学问题。相比之下,在类似的情况下,奥利金表现出不耐烦和易怒。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享
查看原文
Philosophical renovation in the 3rd century: The polemical component of Porphyry’s Vita Plotini in relation to Gregory of Neocaesaria’s Oratio Panegyrica
This paper offers an analysis of similar and parallel developing projects of creating a true philosophy by the disciples and followers of Origen and Plotinus. Two texts permeated by the eulogy of the scholarch are analysed: Gregory the Wonderworker’s The Address of Thanksgiving to Origen and the Life of Plotinus by Porphyry. Gregory was a student of Origen, while Porphyry attended his school long enough to become familiar with the doctrine, teaching methods and personality of the scholarch. The author establishes the structural, thematic and lexical similarity of both texts. The text by Gregory the Wonderworker, chronologically earlier, was a pushing away point for Porphyry in creating an image of the ideal scholarch in the person of Plotinus. This is confirmed by the structural and lexical contrast in the portrayal of Plotinus in Vita Plotini and Origen in the passage preserved by Proclus (Procl. In Tim. I.63. 29–33). In particular, the negative image of Origen in Vita Plotini 13. 10–17 is echoed by the figure of Thaumasius, dissatisfied with the protracted dispute between Plotinus and Porphyry, which rarely draws the scholars’ attention. Nowhere else mentioned, Thaumasius appears as a marginal figure: either he himself was interested in general statements and wanted to hear Plotinus speaking in the manner of a set treatise (trans. Armstrong), or he wanted Plotinus to “faire une conférence suivie et propre à être écrite” (trans. Bréhier). The author hypothesises that it is not a proper name but a nickname. The author suggests that Thaumasius is not an accidental participant in a specific episode of the Neoplatonists’ school life but the philosophical rival of the Neoplatonists, theologian Origen, ironically presented in an unattractive manner. Thus, the deliberately constructed episode with Plotinus and Thaumasius is a polemical jab at Origen’s followers, who put forward a programme of philosophical renovation alternative to the Platonic, and the very depiction of Plotinus as a ‘divine man’ (θεῖος ἀνήρ) responds to the image of Origen painted by his followers. The supposed allusions in Vita Plotini 13. 5–17 testify to the openness of the Roman Neoplatonic school to the already-formed Christian version of philosophy. For this reason, Porphyry chose to portray a situation in which Plotinus showed attention and patience in interpreting difficult philosophical questions for three days. In contrast, Origen, in a similar situation, showed impatience and irritability.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信