Persephone and Eros
byMieke Mosmuller
09-07-2014
9 comments
On what is that proud feeling of the individual based? Science reduces that uniqueness to a complex whole of genetic information, the living human being however feels a need of self-development and self-experience. When one reaches that point with independent thinking one gets the impression that one has come to a limit in thinking. Evolution of the living bodies can be thought through up to a certain point and then be reversed, as I have tried by thinking about evolution and involution, about the development of the simplest living being to the most complicated ones against the realization of the primal image of the most complicated and perfect human being, that was already there in the beginning.
Now, in that sequence of thought more or less inevitable the wilful human individuality appears, of which billions seem to exist. Each individual strives for confirmation of the self and also searches it in the unification with others. In race, nation, nationality, religion, church, association, the club, the sports club, and so on…
Humanity as a whole is viewed in contrary to the plurality and diversity. Here independent thinking comes to a limit and on that limit one can imagine how in ancient times, when humanity did not have so much intellectual development yet, but apparently much more wisdom in stead, it was not explained in a rational way what that proud feeling was based on. It was painted in myths, what has happened to humanity as a unity, because of which it became a collection of proud self-loving individuals. (That there is much more to say about the individual is clear. I only want to demonstrate one aspect here).
I will tell such a myth from Greek mythology.
‘In ancient time humanity assimilated nature with a primal power such as he had fed himself and had quenched his thirst. There had not been a difference yet between the conscious and the unconscious, no difference between one and another human being. Nature, mother earth, was truly the mother to mankind, she fed it and refreshed it with fruits of the fields, with juices from the springs, the rivers, but also with beauty of the colours and scents. Humanity had been one with the mother, Demeter. In the inner life of mankind she gave birth to the perception of her beauty and purity over and over again as her daughter Persephone. She, Persephone, was the living experience of the being of mother earth. She had never seen herself and humanity had not seen itself either. Persephone embroidered on the veil of Demeter, creating beautiful images that the human beings were allowed to experience, if they only were not tempted by love for themselves.
But the powers of death wanted to grasp Persephone, they wanted to get the experience in the human inner life. They wanted to exclude humanity from the divine unity, from the unity with Mother Nature. Only images should be there in the consciousness, images of nature, of God, not the reality. Nature had to die in the consciousness of mankind, Persephone had to be abducted to Hades, to the subconscious.
With tempting words, promising her deep insight in the incomprehensible earth and herself, he convinced her to pick the flower.
Oh what a disaster came over Persephone and together with that over the inner experience of humanity! The powers of fate, of death, of loss, of longing took over the inner life of humanity…’
Persephone, Acropolis Museum, AthensPersephone and Eros by Mieke Mosmuller
Now, in that sequence of thought more or less inevitable the wilful human individuality appears, of which billions seem to exist. Each individual strives for confirmation of the self and also searches it in the unification with others. In race, nation, nationality, religion, church, association, the club, the sports club, and so on…
Humanity as a whole is viewed in contrary to the plurality and diversity. Here independent thinking comes to a limit and on that limit one can imagine how in ancient times, when humanity did not have so much intellectual development yet, but apparently much more wisdom in stead, it was not explained in a rational way what that proud feeling was based on. It was painted in myths, what has happened to humanity as a unity, because of which it became a collection of proud self-loving individuals. (That there is much more to say about the individual is clear. I only want to demonstrate one aspect here).
I will tell such a myth from Greek mythology.
‘In ancient time humanity assimilated nature with a primal power such as he had fed himself and had quenched his thirst. There had not been a difference yet between the conscious and the unconscious, no difference between one and another human being. Nature, mother earth, was truly the mother to mankind, she fed it and refreshed it with fruits of the fields, with juices from the springs, the rivers, but also with beauty of the colours and scents. Humanity had been one with the mother, Demeter. In the inner life of mankind she gave birth to the perception of her beauty and purity over and over again as her daughter Persephone. She, Persephone, was the living experience of the being of mother earth. She had never seen herself and humanity had not seen itself either. Persephone embroidered on the veil of Demeter, creating beautiful images that the human beings were allowed to experience, if they only were not tempted by love for themselves.
But the powers of death wanted to grasp Persephone, they wanted to get the experience in the human inner life. They wanted to exclude humanity from the divine unity, from the unity with Mother Nature. Only images should be there in the consciousness, images of nature, of God, not the reality. Nature had to die in the consciousness of mankind, Persephone had to be abducted to Hades, to the subconscious.
The God of the Hades, who never laughs, sent as a seducer Eros, to let her pick the flower of self-love. Eros spoke seducing words to Persephone, who longed to understand the riddles of the earth. Demeter had warned her, to embroider on diligently on the veil and to pick no flower in the garden, on no account. But Eros told her that this flower was the earthly form of her star… Persephone asked for the name of the flower and Eros called the name: Narcissus…
With tempting words, promising her deep insight in the incomprehensible earth and herself, he convinced her to pick the flower.
Oh what a disaster came over Persephone and together with that over the inner experience of humanity! The powers of fate, of death, of loss, of longing took over the inner life of humanity…’
Persephone, Acropolis Museum, AthensPersephone and Eros by Mieke Mosmuller
Comments
-
From Sina Jante @Nun, aber da ist doch immer noch Eines, ein Dieses oder ein Jenes, ein im-Grunde-beides, und somit doch ein EINES, das genau solchen Mythos noch sehen und erwähnen kann, das "Heil" von "Unheil" unterscheidet. Das weiß also Beides, die Einheit und die Getrenntheit, die Bewusstheit und die Unbewusstheit. Wo steht das dann?
-
From Mieke Mosmuller @Hier (im Mythos) spricht das Eine (das von Einheit und Getrenntheit weiss) die Getrenntheit aus, und ist selbst nicht verschwunden oder vernichtet.
-
From Sina Jante @Ja, eben. Das IST. Und das ist so gesehen auch in allen und jenen, die diesen Mythos glauben. Wobei dieses "glauben" aus meiner Sicht kein dumpfes, unwissendes, bloß hoffendes ist, sondern ein webendes. So wie das Weben der kleinen FABEL bei Novalis in dem Märchen von Eros und Fabel innerhalb des Romanes "Heinrich von Ofterdingen". :-) Vielen Dank.
-
From Frans Cuijpers @Bij lezing van deze tekst, stuit ik op een aantal ogenschijnlijke taalkundige " futiliteiten", doch deze zijn van dien aard dat de redeneer
Ijn wordt doorbroken. Het betreft: 1. Iets wordt gereduceerd tot een complex geheel ! ( Dat sluit elkaar uit) 2. Min of meer onontkoombaar is een contradictio in terminis. 3. Waar staat dat de mensheid schijnbaar een andere denkwereld had, wordt het tegenovergestelde bedoeld: blijkbaar! -
From Mieke Mosmuller @Ik moet deze drie punten van kritiek afwijzen. 1. 'Iets' wordt in de betreffende zin niet gereduceerd tot een complex geheel. Complex geheel heeft geen betrekking tot de reductie maar is een predicaat van 'genetische informatie', die een complex geheel is. De reductie bestaat uit het zich beperken tot de genetische informatie, niet uit een zich beperken tot een complex geheel. 2. Onontkoombaar is een woord dat iets aanduidt, en wel, dat er aan iets niet te ontkomen valt. Nu kan men in het denken het onontkoombare bijvoorbeeld over het hoofd (willen) zien. Daarom zeg ik: min of meer, om het in beweging te brengen, dit onontkoombare. 3. Volgens Van Dale heeft schijnbaar in bijwoordelijk gebruik een andere betekenis: 'klaarblijkelijk'. Het gebruik van schijnbaar in deze betekenis is vergelijkbaar met dat van blijkbaar.
-
From Margareta Bannmann @Diese Schilderung des Mythos, liebe Mieke, ist so wunderschön und tief ergreifend, dass die Seele schaudernd erkennt: das bin ja ich!
Und ebenso schaudernd erkennt sie, dass das Heilvolle, von dem Sina spricht, nur im erneuten und ganz neuen Weben des Schleiers zu erwerben ist von der stolzen Individualität, die so gar keine Lust zum Weben hat. Das Bild ist sehr treffend - so hatte ich die Statue noch nie gesehen. Wir wissen ja, wie das Drama weg-geliebt wurde, und so kann man die vom Stolz befreiende Haltung unter anderem auch in dem richtig verstandenen Rilke Wort "Sein Wachstum ist: der Tiefbesiegte von immer Größerem zu sein" finden. Deine Gedanken-Fäden in all Deinen Werken sind dabei so hilfreich! Vielen Dank, liebe Mieke! -
From Bernhard Hartmann @Zu diesem Mythos gehören auch Orpheus und Eurydike. Orpheus, der Hoffnungsträger einer im aristotelischen Geiste gereiften Ich-Kraft, der mit Eurydike zusammen den Schleier einer neuen Verbundenheit webt. Ich Grüsse Sie mit Respekt vor Ihrer Arbeit der "seelischen Beobachtung" ein Tor offen zu halten. Bernhard Albrecht Hartmann
-
From Machteld Veenker @Und ich danke ihr richt hertzlich, Herr B.A.Hartmann for ihren letzte schönen Satz! Das kan ich nur bestätigen und öffnet bestimmt auchTür und Tor zur Verbindung.
-
From Bernhard Hartmann @Ich werde sehen was sich machen lässt, bei meiner gegenwärtigen noch sehr intensiven Arbeit in Krisenfeldern des sozialen Raumes.