The Excess of the I: Richard of St. Victor on Incommunicable Subsistence

The most accurate definition of what an I is can be found in Richard of St. Victor:

Dicatur itaque a Daniele Danielitas, sicut ab homine humanitas. Danielitas itaque intelligatur illa substantialitas, vel, si magis placet, illa subsistentia ex qua Daniel esse habet illa substantia quae ipse est et quam participare non potest aliqua alia. Humanitas itaque, sicut corporalitas, est multis communis. Danielitas vero omnino incommunicabilis.

Richardus a S. Victore, De Trinitate II, c. 12

“Therefore, let ‘Danielity’ be named from Daniel, just as ‘humanity’ is named from a human being. Accordingly, ‘Danielity’ should be understood as that substantiality — or, if one prefers, that subsistence — by which Daniel has being: that very substance which he himself is and which no other can share. ‘Humanity,’ however, like ‘corporeality,’ is common to many; but ‘Danielity’ is entirely incommunicable.”

The individual is constituted by a subsistentia that gives him that substance which he himself is (illa substantia quae ipse est) — a reality that cannot be participated in or shared by any other.

Comments

Poetry dwells near the divine light's breath

The comparison between poetry and divine light that we have proposed HERE finds its perfect explanation in Saint Paul, Epistle to the Romans 1:19: τ ὸ γνωστὸν τοῦ θεοῦ φανερόν ἐστιν ἐν αὐτοῖς, ὁ θεὸς γὰρ αὐτοῖς ἐφανέρωσεν — “that which may be known of God has been made manifest in them (in men), for God has manifested it unto them”. Poetry unveils within the human being the need to be human, that is, the need for Beauty, the need to feel Beauty within oneself and alongside oneself; and this feeling is sustained by divine light. Since we are influenced by the Augustinian idea of saeculum , we hold that poetry belongs to the saeculum and therefore comes to a halt upon the threshold of divine light [I] without crossing it, though perceiving the light that lies beyond that threshold. We are led to that threshold by the human feeling of Beauty that dwells within us and guides us to that point: to that door which cannot be crossed in our human condition. And yet, the mere act of stan...

Similarities between Lithuanian, Sanskrit and Ancient Greek: the sigmatic future

by Fabrizio Ulivieri Lithuanian is the most archaic among all the Indo-European languages spoken today, and as a result it is very useful, indeed, indispensable in the study of Indo-European linguistics. The most important fact is that Lithuanian is not only very archaic, but still very much alive, i. e., it is spoken by about three and a half million people. It has a rich tradition in folklore, in literature, and it is used very successfully in all walks of modern life, including the most advanced scientific research. Forced by our interest for this piece of living archaism, we go deeper in our linguistic survey. One of the most noticeable similarities is the future (- sigmatic future -). Lithuanian has preserved a future tense from prehistoric times: it has one single form, e.g. kalbė-siu 'I will speak', etc. kalbė-si kalbė-s kalbė-sime kalbė-site kalbė-s This form kalbėsiu is made from the stem kalbė-(ti) 'to speak', plus the ancient stem-end...

L'ombra del dharma

Può qualcuno nascondere la verità per tutta la sua vita e ingannare sé e tutti gli altri? Vi sono demoni nell'uomo, che vengono di lontano - per linee di sangue e generazioni che, se li ascolti, si fanno tuo dharma Se cerco di spiegare quello che eri Devo l' oltre e il prima guardare Dove cause ignote e foschi criteri Erano il karma del tuo andare. Di lí andavi larvato di nulla E mai il volto sincero mostravi. Di silenzio vivevi in una bolla Eppure libero a me sembravi. In pubblico e privato ti scindevi E disprezzavi me a te non pari Ma santo mi apparivi e tu sapevi. Del tuo dharma che adesso appari Eri schiavo - di quel lontano demone Tara remota e senza memoria Che nel sangue ti seguiva epigone E segnava immemore tua la storia.

Fabrizio Ulivieri - Content Creator

Search This Blog