HUMANITY'S TRYST IN DECIPHERING MARRIAGES FROM MYTHOLOGY: BRAIDING LITERATURE AND ART

Studying Anthropology of Art has been a matter of long-term qualitative research studied under Cultural Anthropology. Understanding Anthropology of Art is therefore something which involves transcending over the regimented boundaries of culture and art. Entering this complex process of interpreting anthropological aspects, we delved deep into the context and examination of Indian art and iconography. Our heritage has evidently focused very strongly on the meaningfulness of art to society, interpreting human cognition into a concrete order. The depiction of the divine union of Shiva-Parvati, is thematically represented extensively in Indian sculpture art. Regrettably, this very fascinating matter did not receive a very comprehensive consideration so far. Our purpose for undertaking this analysis is to reckon wisdom of the extant of incorporating mythological culture and rituals into present human society, diverse expressions of art, associated with different age and time period, all with a single awe-inspiring theme- The Marriage of Shiva and Parvati. Thereafter, keeping in mind the textual references available, we have kept ourselves restricted to the study, strictly coinciding with the theme depicted in Indian sculpture. Indian art has an immense affinity towards mythology and depiction of the events in a cosmic scale. Indian temple sculpture is a celebration of the divine ceremonies. Doing this, we find relevant textual interpretations and references from Kalidas’ Kumarasambhava, an epic recounting the events leading to the ‘Kalyanasundara’- the iconographical depiction of the wedding rites of Shiva and Parvati and the birth of Kartika, making the art study an extension of literary apotheosis. KEYWORDS: Anthropology of Art, Cultural Anthropology, Indian Art and Sculpture, Kumarsambhava

Roh di Endor Pemanggilan Roh dalam 1 Samuel 28:1-25 dan Ajaran Aliran Pangestu

AbstrakPenelitian ini menelusuri ajaran dalam 1 Sam. 28 yang terkait dengan pemanggilan rohorang mati dan membandingkan dengan ajaran Aliran Pangestu mengenai hal itu. Hasilpenelitian pada konteks kitab Samuel menunjukkan bahwa roh yang muncul di Endoradalah bukan roh Samuel, sedangkan dalam ajaran Pengestu mengenai kematian jugadapat disimpulkan bahwa, roh di Endor juga bukanlah roh Samuel karena roh Samuelsudah menyatu atau lebur dengan Allah. Hasilnya dapat dipergunakan dalam proseskontekstualisasi bagi orang-orang Pangestu yang telah menjadi warga Gereja Kristennamun masih diwarnai pandangan lama mereka. AbstractThis article explores the teaching in 1 Samuel 28 about the summoning of the spirit in comparison with the teaching of Pangestu Beliefs concerning the issue. Based on analysis of the historical context of the Book of Samuel, the result shows that the spirit in Endor is not that of Samuel while based on the teaching of Pangestu about death, the spirit in Endor is not the spirit of Samuel either because his spirit has merged in Divine Union. The result of this study can be used in the contextualization process for the Pangestu adherents who have joined the Christian church but still cling to their old-world view.

“El entendimiento con el qual me conoscan”: Intellectual Mysticism in the Visión Deleitable

Visión deleytable is a fictional tale based in the Aristotelian philosophical and Neoplatonic mystical beliefs of the Judeo-Arabic tradition of medieval Iberia. This fifteenth-century work of imaginative fiction, a “best-seller” among Iberian readers, tells of the ascent of the active intellect to the celestial spheres and an experience of God. In this narrative, knowledge of the Latin trivium and quadrivium are combined with that of the Arabo-Andalusi philosophic traditions. Particularly noteworthy is the author, De la Torre’s extensive use of Maimonides’ work, the Guide of the Perplexed, as a source for the wisdom revealed in the Visión deleytable. While Maimonides’ position on the mystic experience is debated by contemporary scholars, in the present study I explore how the concept of intellectual mysticism, applied to the Neoplatonic/Aristotelian model of the intellect’s conjunction with the divine as found in Maimonides’ work, also describes the goal toward which the protagonist (and reader) of the Visión deleytable strive. As such, the Visión deleytable reveals how this notion of human-divine union (most notably in the concept of the “prophet-angel”) from the Judeo-Andalusi tradition, transmitted in Arabic and Hebrew, was translated into Spanish and adopted into the Catholic and converso frameworks of the Visión deleytable in fifteenth-century Iberia.

Companionship, Human Perfection, and Divine Union in Thirteenth-Century Persian Sufism

This article reevaluates Rūmī’s approach to divine union in the light of the larger institutional and normative context that orchestrates it. Via key terms “spiritual companionship” [ṣuḥba] and normative Sufi “conduct” [adab], I situate Rūmī within the Khurasanian Sufi milieu wherein divine union was perceived as a communicative and communal process whereby the existentiating divine mercy overflows to, and reflects from, embodied companions. Not only Rūmī’s, but also Farīd al-Dīn ʿAṭṭār’s approach to divine union can be better appreciated in this normative Sufi setting where the perfection of human soul, body, speech, and agency coincide with an apophatic communion of companions.

Empathy and divine union in Kierkegaard: solving the faith/history problem in Philosophical Fragments

Søren Kierkegaard's account of faith in Philosophical Fragments claims that the historical Incarnation is necessary for faith, but that historical evidence for the Incarnation is neither necessary nor sufficient for faith. It has been argued that the defence of these two claims gives rise to a faith/history problem for Kierkegaard and that it is incoherent to defend an account of faith which affirms both the necessity of the historical Incarnation and rejects the necessity and sufficiency of the historical evidence for the Incarnation. I argue that this problem can be solved by applying Eleonore Stump's (2013) account of divine–human union. I argue that the Incarnation is necessary because it allows us to enjoy a kind of mutual empathy with Christ which is the basis of divine–human union and that the historical evidence is neither necessary nor sufficient since faith is grounded in a second-person experience of Christ. I claim that this solves the faith/history problem and offers a way of defending Kierkegaard's account of faith as coherent.