1,721,016 research outputs found
45. Vasiliu (Anca), Du diaphane
No full textLa Marle H. 45. Vasiliu (Anca), Du diaphane. In: Revue des Études Grecques, tome 112, Janvier-juin 1999. pp. 312-313
45. Vasiliu (Anca), Du diaphane
No full textLa Marle H. 45. Vasiliu (Anca), Du diaphane. In: Revue des Études Grecques, tome 112, Janvier-juin 1999. pp. 312-313
Eikôn. Imaginea în discursul celor trei Părinți Capadocieni
No full text[Eikôn. Das Bild in der Rede der drei Kappadokier], übersetzt aus Französisch ins Rumänisch von Georgiana Huian (Originalauflage: Eikôn. L’image dans le discours des trois Cappadociens, Paris, PUF, 2010, 370 p)
Le cahier du peintre Radu et la pratique des modèles dans la tradition post-byzantine
No full textVasiliu Anca. Le cahier du peintre Radu et la pratique des modèles dans la tradition post-byzantine. In: Revue de l'Art, 1992, n°97. pp. 32-45
The word and the symbol : a philosophical dimension in Philo of Alexandria
No full textL’auteur que nous étudions se tourne vers un champ des connaissances humaines inexploré à son époque : celui du symbole comme modalité de communication entre le langage divin toujours merveilleux et celui humain qui n’est ni clair ni précis. Sur ce philosophe et exégète de la Bible des Septante qui est juif de culture hellénistique, nous approfondissons un aspect que les critiques considèrent souvent comme marginal compte tenu des exigences de l’exégèse allégorique : le rôle joué par le ‘ symbole ’ (σύμβολον) dans la quête infinie de l’Éternel. L’usage des images symboliques est largement répandu dans le Commentaire allégorique des Saintes Lois comme dans les autres œuvres, au point de constituer un outil au sein de l’exégèse elle-même, pour donner une cohérence à l’interprétation du texte scripturaire. C’est cet ensemble éparpillé que nous allons essayer de recomposer, en faisant ressortir la dimension philosophique du symbole qui ne reste pas subordonnée aux schémas de l’allégorie, liée à un plan méthodologique plus ou moins figé, mais qui prend la forme d’une observation plus ample sur la façon dont le langage symbolique, sous toutes les coutures, et pas seulement dans le domaine biblique, révèle la présence de l’Éternel. L’aspect le plus important est que l’Alexandrin a compris la structure du langage symbolique du Pentateuque, en le faisant devenir l’objet d’intérêt philosophique. Philon a ouvert le symbole à des horizons nouveaux, à un regard neuf sur le sacré qui est dans l’homme et dans le cosmos, qui n’est plus strictement fonctionnel à l’allégorèse des récits de la mythologie grecque ou des livres religieux des Juifs.The purpose of this research is to show that Philo of Alexandria’s Allegorical Commentary contains an exceptional novelty compared to the time when it was written. The author addresses an almost unexplored field, that of reflection on language and the symbols that compose it. The nature and function of the symbol are not analysed by Philo in specific texts, but are widely dealt with in many parts of the Allegorical Commentary and constitute, as a whole, one of the most significant nuclei of Philo’s thought, which has not always been given the right importance by critics. From this thematic core it has emerged that the interest in symbols in the Alexandrian does not remain subordinate to the biblical commentary, but takes the form of an autonomous reflection on the ways in which symbolic language, in its various forms, comes from the divine Logos and opens the human intellect to a look at the sacred that pervades the whole cosmos. In Philo, moreover, there is the awareness that symbolism is not strictly functional to the allegory of Greek myth or to that of the Torah, as it had happened and was happening in the Hellenistic-Roman-Judaic cultural environment present in Alexandria. In the treatises, it appears that the interpretation of each symbol, by its nature polysemic and transversal to different cultures and spheres, although it varies according to the context in which it is inserted, however, has a core of unique and deep meaning that is the representation of the divine archetype, which it has the power to recall to the intellect
Le mot et le verre. Une definition médiévale du diaphane.
No full textVasiliu Anca. Le mot et le verre. Une definition médiévale du diaphane.. In: Journal des savants, 1994, n°1. pp. 135-162
Plotinus, Gnostics and Christians : a debate about the conception of the first principle
No full textDans le Traité 33 (II 9), Plotin se dresse contre les « gnostiques » : ceux qui disent que le démiurge et le monde sont mauvais. Ses critiques sont précédées par une introduction qui résume sa doctrine de l’Un-Bien et de l’Intellect. Dans le premier chapitre du Traité 33, à partir des thèses de ses adversaires, Plotin construit une série de propositions concernant les réalités premières – leur nombre, leur nature et leurs actions. Il dénonce les erreurs de chaque proposition, comme conduisant à la construction d’un univers des intelligibles défectueux, ignorants et impuissants. La thèse porte sur la place de la métaphysique de Plotin dans sa polémique antignostique. Les arguments qui introduisent cette polémique sont construits de manière à pouvoir rejoindre les principales conceptions du principe premier : celles proposées par les principales écoles philosophiques et celles qui ont été élaborées par les différents courants du gnosticisme et du christianisme. Plotin s’intéresse à ces doctrines nouvelles, émergentes en marge des écoles philosophiques. Le rapport entre Plotin et le christianisme est l’objet de notre attention. La perspective métaphysique permet d’examiner tous les courants doctrinaux du christianisme primitif. Une partie de la critique plotinienne va à l’encontre des efforts des chrétiens à respecter les exigences du monothéisme par rapport à l’idée d’un « autre Dieu ». À leur opposé se situent les gnostiques qui proposent une multiplication des entités issues du premier principe. Ainsi, la conception plotinienne du principe transcendant, après lequel viennent les hypostases ayant rang de principes, répond aux interrogations de ses nombreux adversaires.In Treatise 33 (II 9), Plotinus stands against the “Gnostics”: those who consider the demiurge and the cosmos to be evil. His criticisms are preceded by an introduction summarizing the Plotinian doctrine of the supreme principle – the One. In the first chapter of Treatise 33, based on the theses of his opponents, Plotinus constructs a series of propositions concerning the first realities - their number, their nature and their activities. He denounces the errors of each proposition as leading to the construction of a universe of defective, ignorant and helpless intelligibles. This thesis deals with the place of the metaphysics of Plotinus in his anti-Gnostic polemics. The arguments constituting these polemics are constructed to fit within the principal conceptions of the first principle - not only those proposed by the main philosophical schools, but especially those designed within different currents of Gnosticism and of Christianity. Plotinus is interested in these new doctrines emerging on the margins of the established philosophical schools. The object of our attention is the relationship between Plotinus and Christianity. The metaphysical perspective enables us to examine all the doctrinal currents of primitive Christianity. Part of Plotinian criticism may go against the efforts of Christian writers to respect the demands of monotheism in relation to the idea of "another God". At their opposite are the Gnostics, who propose multiplication of entities derived from the first principle, the Pleroma. Thus, the Plotinian conception of the supreme principle, after which come the hypostases having the rank of principles, answers the questions posed by his adversaries
Il Neoplatonismo di Ermia di Alessandria: uno studio sugli In Platonis Phaedrum Scholia
Full text link2019 - 2020The present study consists of a critical analysis of Book I of the Commentary on Plato’s
Phaedrus by Hermias of Alexandria (fifth century AD), that is, the only ancient commentary on
Plato’s Phaedrus that has been handed down to us.
We have divided our work into three major chapters. In the first chapter, entitled ‘The school
of Alexandria’, we have tried to outline a precise picture of the historical and philosophical context
in which the figure of Hermias of Alexandria, professor of Platonic philosophy between around 435
and 455 AD, has flourished. We have preferred to trace a history of the philosophy in Alexandria in
the Late Antiquity rather than the history of the ‘commentary tradition’ in Antiquity: in fact,
numerous and important works have already been dedicated to the latter theme (Mansfeld, Hadot,
Blumenthal, Baltussen), all of which are at the basis of our study and are often recalled. Rather, there
are two points of interest in the first section of our thesis. On the one hand, we have put forth a new
insight into the relationships of Hierocles and Hermias with the Christian authorities of Alexandria;
on the other, we have undertaken a critical analysis of the communis opinio according to which the
Notes to the Phaedrus – which is a translation nearer to the Greek Εἰς τὸν Πλάτωνος Φαῖδρον Σχόλια
– would be nothing more than a commentary ἀπὸ τῆς φωνῆς: that is to say, nothing more than a
collection of notes that the young Hermias put up during his master Syrianus’ classes on the Phaedrus,
in Athens. We try to argue, in one case, that Hermias has been deliberately preferred to Hierocles on
the chair of Platonic philosophy in Alexandria by the Christian authorities of the city, headed by
Patriarch Cyril. Hierocles, although he was older and more famous than Hermias, not only has not
been officially recognized, through the concession of economic benefits, as was the case of Hermias,
but he has also experienced the exile from Alexandria and the torture in Constantinople by the
Christian authorities of the city. On the contrary, Hermias, described in our sources as a mild and
studious personality, received some economic privileges from the city and, as we will see, made use
in his Commentary of a lexicon attested only in the works of Cyril. In the other case, by critically
sifting the arguments in support of the vulgate, we try to claim the authorship of the Commentary to
Hermias himself, as the manuscript tradition suggests. Nonetheless, in the absence of irrefutable
evidence in both directions, this section does not want and cannot be an apodictic section, but rather
a problematic and hypothetic one. However, the first chapter is not limited to a historical examination,
but also opens to a first philosophical analysis of the Commentary, addressing the questions of
theurgy, that is to say, of rituality, material and immaterial, and that of the one of the human soul,
that is, that divine component of the human soul thanks to which the human being is enabled to receive
the divinity into himself, joining the divine in himself with the divine tout court. .. [edited by Author]Il presente studio consiste in un’analisi critica del libro I del Commento al Fedro di
Ermia di Alessandria (V d. C.), vale a dire, dell’unico commento antico al Fedro di
Platone sopravvissuto fino ai giorni nostri.
Abbiamo organizzato il nostro lavoro in tre capitoli maggiori. Nel primo capitolo,
intitolato La scuola di Alessandria, ci siamo sforzati di delineare un quadro preciso del
contesto storico e filosofico nel quale si inscrive la figura di Ermia di Alessandria,
professore di filosofia platonica nella città del Faro tra il 435 e il 455 d. C. circa. Abbiamo
preferito, in effetti, tracciare una storia della filosofia ad Alessandria in Età Tardoantica
piuttosto che riandare la storia del genere “commentario” nell’Antichità: a quest’ultimo
tema sono, infatti, già stati dedicati innumeri e importanti lavori negli ultimi decenni
(Mansfeld, Hadot, Blumenthal, Baltussen), i quali tutti sono alla base del nostro studio e
vi sono spesse volte rievocati. Piuttosto, due sono i punti di interesse della prima macrosezione della nostra tesi. Da un lato, la nuova proposta ricostruttiva dei rapporti di Ierocle
ed Ermia con le autorità cristiane di Alessandria, dall’altro, l’analisi critica della
communis opinio secondo cui le Note al Fedro – titolo, questo, maggiormente rispettoso
del greco Εἰς τὸν Πλάτωνος Φαῖδρον Σχόλια – non sarebbero altro che un commentario
ἀπὸ τῆς φωνῆς: vale a dire, null’altro che una raccolta di note del giovane Ermia messa
su durante le lezioni del maestro Siriano sul Fedro, ad Atene. Proviamo a sostenere,
infatti, nell’un caso, che Ermia sia stato deliberatamente preferito a Ierocle sulla cattedra
di filosofia platonica ad Alessandria dalle autorità cristiane della città, capeggiate dal
Patriarca Cirillo. Ierocle, infatti, benché fosse più anziano e noto di Ermia, non solo non
fu riconosciuto ufficialmente, per il tramite dell’elargizione di beneficî economici, come
fu nel caso di Ermia, ma, per di più, conobbe l’esilio da Alessandria e le torture a
Costantinopoli da parte delle autorità cristiane della città. Al contrario, Ermia, descritto
nelle nostre fonti come una personalità mite e studiosa, ricevette un privilegio economico
dalla città e, come vedremo meglio, fece uso nel suo Commento di un lessico
specificamente proprio delle opere di Cirillo. Nell’altro caso, invece, passando
criticamente al setaccio a una a una le argomentazioni a sostegno della vulgata, noi
tentiamo di rivendicare la paternità del Commento a Ermia di Alessandria, come vuole la
tradizione manoscritta. Nondimeno, in mancanza di prove irrefutabili in ambo i sensi, questa sezione non vuole né può essere una sezione apodittica, bensì problematica e
speculativa. E, tuttavia, il capitolo primo non si limita a una disamina storica, ma si apre
anche a una prima analisi filosofica del Commento, abbordando le questioni della teurgia,
vale a dire, della ritualità, materiale e immateriale, a mezzo della quale i Neoplatonici
intendevano raggiungere la unio mistica, e dell’uno dell’anima umana, vale a dire, di
quella componente divina dell’anima umana, grazie alla quale soltanto è dato all’uomo
accogliere in sé la divinità, congiungendo il divino in sé col divino tout court. .. [a cura dell'Autore]XXXIII cicl
The challenge of unity in distinction. The Anthropology of Nemesius of Emesa between Plato and Platonism
No full textCe travail doctoral porte sur la vision anthropologique développée dans le De natura hominis par Némésius d’Émèse (fin IVe s. ap. J.-C.). Plus précisément, l’analyse que nous proposons vise à cerner les moyens théoriques par lesquels Némésius, théologien, philosophe et médecin, justifie l’union de l’âme avec le corps, tout en préservant la conception platonicienne de l’âme comme substance indépendante et immortelle. Selon notre interprétation, l’évêque d’Émèse aurait trouvé dans la doctrine porphyrienne de l’union sans confusion un outil efficace pour préserver le caractère séparé et incorruptible de l’âme, mais pas pour rendre compte des liens psychophysiques. Pour ces derniers, il recourt aux thèses galéniques qu’il considère comme compatibles avec son platonisme, à savoir : l’influence de la κρᾶσις du corps sur l’âme ; la correspondance entre l’espèce des âmes et l’espèce des êtres vivants ; la localisation des δυνάμεις psychiques dans les organes corporels. Cette étude entend également contribuer à modifier le jugement négatif qui a pesé pendant longtemps sur les études de l’œuvre de Némésius et à attirer l’attention sur certains aspects infondés de la critique du De natura hominis. Cet ouvrage n’est pas une simple doxographie, comme l’ont soutenu Jaeger (1914) et Skard (1936 ; 1940), car l’auteur montre qu’il a suivi un plan précis et qu’il a sélectionné et organisé ses sources afin de répondre à son objectif général. Enfin, le traité némésien comporte plusieurs thèses et expressions qui le situent dans le cadre de la pensée chrétienne de la seconde moitié du IVe siècle. Le De natura hominis est donc le point de départ d’une analyse plus ample couvrant, par exemple, l’application théologique du concept d’union inconfuse et des modèles aristotéliciens et stoïciens de mélange par les Pères de cette époque, ainsi que l’utilisation de la physiologie de Galien dans le De hominis opificio de Grégoire de Nysse.This thesis focuses on the anthropological vision developed in the De natura hominis by Nemesius of Emesa(late 4th century CE). More specifically, the aim is to examine the attempt by the author to justify the union ofthe soul and the body, while maintaining the Platonic conception of the soul as an independent and immortalsubstance. The interpretation I propose is that Nemesius finds in the Porphyrian doctrine of union withoutconfusion an effective tool for preserving the separate and incorruptible nature of the soul, but not forexplaining psychophysical links. For this purpose, he resorts to the Galenic theses which he perceived ascompatible with his Platonism, namely the influence of the corporeal κρᾶσις on the soul; the correspondencebetween the species of souls and the species of living beings and the localization of psychic δυνάμεις in thebodily organs. This dissertation also intends to contribute to overcoming the negative judgment that has longinfluenced the research on the De natura hominis and to draw critical attention on this treatise. This work is nota mere doxography, as argued by Jaeger (1914) and Skard (1936; 1940), for the author shows to have followeda precise plan and to have selected and organized his sources in order to attain his general objective. Finally, theDe natura hominis is contextualized within the framework of Christian thought of late fourth century. Hence,the Nemesius’ treatise is the starting point for a broader analysis considering, for example, the theologicalapplication of the concept of inconfuse union and of Aristotelian and Stoic models of mixing by the Fathers ofthis period, as well as the use of Galen’s physiology in Gregory of Nyssa’s De hominis opificio
- …
