Orpheus and the Roots of Platonism
- Downloads：6482
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-06-04 09:52:55
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Algis Uždavinys
- ISBN：1908092076
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
A book on the religious， mystic origins and substance of philosophy。 This is a critical survey of ancient and modern sources and of scholarly works dealing with Orpheus and everything related to this major figure of ancient Greek myth， religion and philosophy。 Here poetic madness meets religious initiation and Platonic philosophy。 This book contains fascinating insights into the usually downplaid relations between Egyptian initiation， Greek mysteries and Plato's philosophy and followers， right into Hellenistic Neoplatonic and Hermetic developments。
Reviews
Carl
，
Your get the eerie sense that “western” religions （Judaism， Christianity， Islam） are derived from ancient Sumerian， Babylonian but primarily Egyptian initiatic systems via Orpheus， Pythagoras and eventually Plato。 The migration into and out of Greece formalizes the soteriological science， a shift away from the mythic subconscious towards the scientific conscious。 The collection of essays are a sort of etiology of early consciousness。 The essays are primarily concerned with the antique。 Succeedin Your get the eerie sense that “western” religions （Judaism， Christianity， Islam） are derived from ancient Sumerian， Babylonian but primarily Egyptian initiatic systems via Orpheus， Pythagoras and eventually Plato。 The migration into and out of Greece formalizes the soteriological science， a shift away from the mythic subconscious towards the scientific conscious。 The collection of essays are a sort of etiology of early consciousness。 The essays are primarily concerned with the antique。 Succeeding traditions come across as trivial and sad facsimiles of a more ancient， advanced mythic system （very rarely mentioned if at all）。 。。。more
Kaye
，
This was an interesting synthesis of materials on Orphism and Platonism， Near Eastern religions， and Egyptian religious concepts。 I wished it had been a bit more systemic — it felt rushed — but there's a lot to unpack here， and I starred a few of the footnoted citations because they prodded my bookworm curiosity about the quotations/references in situ。 I appreciated it and would recommend。 This was an interesting synthesis of materials on Orphism and Platonism， Near Eastern religions， and Egyptian religious concepts。 I wished it had been a bit more systemic — it felt rushed — but there's a lot to unpack here， and I starred a few of the footnoted citations because they prodded my bookworm curiosity about the quotations/references in situ。 I appreciated it and would recommend。 。。。more
Johnny Danell
，
A short but beautiful book。 Scholarly， but also much more than that。 I loved it。
Jeroen
，
Interesting but obstruse and all over the place
Kir 'Bear'
，
The book is loaded with information and interpretations of Egyptian theology of the highest quality， moreover it rewired a part of my understanding about Paganism in general。 I would describe the author as sympathetic to both Egyptian Priest culture and Plato and writes about them in a way that immerses or embeds the reader in an Orphic religion， rather than describes and critiques from the distance。 I prefer this style of scholarship myself。
Carl Bevilacqua
，
Theoria apophasis
Aaron
，
I want to believe！
David
，
A better title might be: Egypt and the Spurious Roots of Platonism。Excluding a handful paragraphs， Orpheus is only mentioned off-hand and secondarily to ancient aegyptian and Assyrian Theology。The first third about Assyrian was convincing， while half the connections with Egypt were repetitive and speculative。 Reading his other works might offer more convincing comparisons （I'm not saying there aren't any， Egypt is undoubtedly influential in every way; but Assyrian connection was stronger， but th A better title might be: Egypt and the Spurious Roots of Platonism。Excluding a handful paragraphs， Orpheus is only mentioned off-hand and secondarily to ancient aegyptian and Assyrian Theology。The first third about Assyrian was convincing， while half the connections with Egypt were repetitive and speculative。 Reading his other works might offer more convincing comparisons （I'm not saying there aren't any， Egypt is undoubtedly influential in every way; but Assyrian connection was stronger， but that might be my "Neoplatonic" bias and his Eastern bias）。The author gives off the impression of Orriental-centrism and an "Iamblichian" view （if that's a word）， perhaps one might even say "anti-neoplatonic"。 。。。more
Minäpäminä
，
Really something。 Much beyond my range， but stimulating still。 Only at the end did I start to suspect Uzdavinys might have been sarcastic at times。 I don't know if he was。I have no idea what to say， except that it was wonderful。 The experience reminded me of reading Zizek a few years back: after I had finished the book （The Plague of Fantasies） I just couldn't say what the hell it had been about and what it had said about that-mysterious-something， but I nonetheless felt it was a great read。I gu Really something。 Much beyond my range， but stimulating still。 Only at the end did I start to suspect Uzdavinys might have been sarcastic at times。 I don't know if he was。I have no idea what to say， except that it was wonderful。 The experience reminded me of reading Zizek a few years back: after I had finished the book （The Plague of Fantasies） I just couldn't say what the hell it had been about and what it had said about that-mysterious-something， but I nonetheless felt it was a great read。I guess Uzdavinys' main thesis was that Plato （maybe） pick-and-choose-d parts of Orphic and Egyptian religious doctrine for his own system， or at the least was much influenced by Parmenides who was very much influenced by the Orphics and the Egyptians。 All this is very contestable because the little we know of Parmenides， the Orphics， and the Egyptians is fragmentary and inevitably interpreted through a European lens across several millenia。 Uzdavinys readily admits this （although I just can't escape the feeling he was being a bit sarcastic）。An enigmatic work。 Will definitely re-read。 。。。more
Maan Kawas
，
A great book， which examines Plato's dialogues from a different perspective or lens， namely， the mystery cults （Orphism） standing or lens。The book also covers other mystery cults and practices， especially those of the Ancient Egyptians， Assyrians， Babylonians， and others。 Although the book is a heavy read， it is so informative and enlightening， and it made feel that I want to read more。 A great book， which examines Plato's dialogues from a different perspective or lens， namely， the mystery cults （Orphism） standing or lens。The book also covers other mystery cults and practices， especially those of the Ancient Egyptians， Assyrians， Babylonians， and others。 Although the book is a heavy read， it is so informative and enlightening， and it made feel that I want to read more。 。。。more
Tony Gualtieri
，
"Perhaps I am the mummy-like jackal who has come from the four corners of Nun and wishes to bark amongst the dogs of Seshat。" Algis Uždavinys （1962-2010） was an incredible scholar of classical theurgy and Greek philosophy。 While he claimed that with this book he had "nothing else to say，" I can't help but feel his insights were congealing into a not quite yet realized but still marvelous synthesis of ancient thought。 This monograph is a exposition of philosophy as Orphean madness， what Plato cal "Perhaps I am the mummy-like jackal who has come from the four corners of Nun and wishes to bark amongst the dogs of Seshat。" Algis Uždavinys （1962-2010） was an incredible scholar of classical theurgy and Greek philosophy。 While he claimed that with this book he had "nothing else to say，" I can't help but feel his insights were congealing into a not quite yet realized but still marvelous synthesis of ancient thought。 This monograph is a exposition of philosophy as Orphean madness， what Plato called erotike mania: the desire for the divine banquet and wisdom。 。。。more
Barnaby Thieme
，
This bizarre little book is an incoherent brain dump of brilliant ideas， reflecting the author's Herculean effort to articulate key points of the lifeworld of antiquity， viz。 knowledge， initiation， immortality， and truth。 It's a prolegomena where a critique is needed， and although it contains many brilliant insights and stunning observations， it's tedious and exhausting to read， coming across like the ranting of an academic in the grip of a manic episode。 The name strikes me as almost entirely a This bizarre little book is an incoherent brain dump of brilliant ideas， reflecting the author's Herculean effort to articulate key points of the lifeworld of antiquity， viz。 knowledge， initiation， immortality， and truth。 It's a prolegomena where a critique is needed， and although it contains many brilliant insights and stunning observations， it's tedious and exhausting to read， coming across like the ranting of an academic in the grip of a manic episode。 The name strikes me as almost entirely arbitrary。 Although Orpheus and Plato appear in the book， Uždavinys dwells as much or more about Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia， Rome， and Europe of the Middle Ages as he does on Greece。 I was deeply put off by his argument by apposition。 He strings thoughts together by association， making no effort whatsoever to motivate or explain why a mystical rite of classical antiquity necessarily had any relationship to the teachings of a Persian Sufi in the eleventh century。 I can't comprehend what， in Uždavinys's mind， an argument consists of， or really， what he was doing， on a very basic level， other than rhapsodizing。 It didn't surprise me that he railed against methodical and careful scholars like M。 L。 West， while praising similarly speculative authors like Jan Assmann， whom he quotes liberally。 Like Assmann， Uždavinys speculates in the most uninhibited way， and posits coherence and unity between distant ideas， seemingly at his convenience。 The fragmentary nature of this odd compendium is perhaps most clearly brought across by its end， or lack thereof。 It stops at a completely arbitrary point。 Despite these numerous and severe flaws， Uždavinys undoubtedly was a master of secondary literature on the ancient world， and the book contains a great many gems。 I believe his basic intuition is sound， and I found his effort to expound on the nature of philosophic thought with respect to its transcendental content， and his deft navigation of diverse traditions by which it played out in different forms， to be at times virtuosic。 He gives an electrifying sense of the vitality of ancient philosophy， and conveys the depth and profundity of its spiritual roots。 It's too bad he seems like such a deeply disorganized individual。 He could have been a truly great scholar， of Peter Brown's caliber。 。。。more
Jose Luis Belmonte
，