The Refracting Crystal and One’s Relationship with the Gods

This post has come about from a couple of starting points. One is in a comment to a friend’s post regarding godspouses, and then again in conversation tonight when speaking of the nature of the gods as it pertains to how we worship and establish relationships with them. The gist was an idea established earlier by Plutarch that when we interact with the gods we are in actuality perhaps interacting with a spirit that a god sends to interact with us on their behalf. And while this may very occasionally be the case in perhaps the most informal of communication, such as perhaps when a person who has an undeveloped relationship with a god is giving up an offering to the god and asking the blessings of a god among other gods invited to the banquet or occasion, I overall disagree that this is a common case. Rather I have my own perceptions on the matter. It was suggested to me in the course of the conversation that I should turn this into a post for my blog, and so I am following that suggestion.

When it comes down to it, the gods as far as I can tell are beyond what our limited perceptions have the ability to cope with, see or even understand. They are huge and immeasurable, and have an entirely different state of existence than us. I would liken this to, say, something vibrating at a higher level, moving faster than we can grasp. The word theoi (for the gods), is directly related to the concept of running. This is a great metaphor I think for how the gods are ever moving, ever running, and ungraspable by us as being who can neither move as fast nor to such heights. But as they are so much bigger and fast than us, that we are incapable of true perception of them, the gods themselves can become multiple as they would desire. A god is one, but at will can divide himself into particulars. We find this particular in the Hellenic religion where we focus at a given time on different perspectives of the god rather than the whole of the god. Any body of art is presented at a given time to a certain form, or in poetic form may deal with specific mythic subjects one at a time. While some scholars say that when a god possesses this many names that it may point to a god absorbing different gods that they come into contact with, it seems more likely to me that these are just refractions of the same being.

The god in this case is as a crystal. Perfect and unblemished, but refracting at so many angles and directions that every time he moves you see something different in each refraction of light being emitted. And then another refraction again where that is too reflected. This can happen in a larger sense as we find with epithets, and in many more tiny precise moments as we find with individual relationships with the gods. A Greek poet Yannis Ritsou wrote of this a bit in his poem Marpessa’s Choice.

“It wasn’t by chance that Marpessa preferred Idas over Apollo,
despite her passion for the god, despite his incomparable beauty —
the kind that made myrtle tremble into blossom as he went by. She
never dared raise her eyes above his knees.
Between his toenails and his knees, what an inexhaustible world,
what exquisite journeys and discoveries between his toenails and his knees.”

It speaks of the full presence and beauty of just the smallest glimpse and smallest portion of the god that an inexhaustible world could dwell between his toenails and knees. And this would be so even with the god not coming in his full glory, for we know that this does not happen. Greek myth when dealing with Semele tells us that the Greeks did not think that ever did the gods come in their true forms to the women that they love, but rather in a smaller proximity form of themselves. Like a shard of light from the massive crystal that is the entirety of their being. A refraction of a refraction of light coming to us, giving us a beautiful image of the god, that is full of the innumerable parts of the god, in touch with each of those portions through the refractions of their own light, but by the choice of the god, presented to us in a smaller way that we may personally communicate with us. It is still our god that we are speaking to and giving worship to, yet never while being the same of the whole, never appearing the same way or having the exact same kind of relationship develop in each way he manifests to each of his devotees.

At the same time his crystal catches the light of other gods nearest to him, and that too can draw our awareness of other closely related gods. I who so love Apollon may catch a reflection of Dionysos in a particular angle of the refraction Apollon shows to me, and through my love of Apollon may show adoration and appreciation more for Dionysos, and perhaps that light of Dionysos too had the reflection carried within it of Aphrodite, and so mingling her essence in my worship to bring her necessity into my life and bind her to how I understand the god I serve. I understand and appreciate the other gods through my devotion to my god, and all of this through the smallest portion, a sliver of his being, that he presents to me.

There is no way, even as immense as the gods appear to us in their fractional selves that they present to us, that we really know how immense the gods are. There is a hindu image I particular love of Krishna and how he presents himself to Arjuna that I am attaching this post in which the god presents his innumerable multi form. For we cannot ever know or comprehend how vast and in how many forms the god has within in his entirety. How many refractions for his divine crystal. And even if we can see numerous face at a given time….we can never see the entire scope of the god and he manifests to each worshiper and devotee. The gods are that limitless and multiformed in their singularity.

Or so I believe it to be.

I would like to note that the concept of the gods as refracting light in crystal is highly influenced by the philosophical-religious concept of Indra’s net in which the gods are like drew drops reflecting light on a net, and each dew drop carries within it the reflection of all those near it from whatever angle you look at it. I took this and isolated it and asked myself what I would see of the dew drop of itself suspended in space refracting light in numerous hues and expressions. So while these are ideas are not completely related it was a significant groundwork for this understanding I developed in my own experience.

krishna1

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “The Refracting Crystal and One’s Relationship with the Gods

  1. Reblogged this on Gangleri's Grove and commented:
    Really interesting post on the nature of Deity….i also disagree with Plutarch but I very much like the faceted crystal image. It’s a good visual metaphor.

  2. I love that image of Krishna as well. The Bhagavad Gita, a moment of which is illustrated in that image, is a key text, I believe, for understanding polycentric polytheism, once one recognizes that, with appropriate differences, style, and emphasis, any God could say things equivalent to what Krishna says about himself in the Gita. I also agree that Indra’s Net, in which each jewel reflects, not just those near it, but all the other jewels in the net, is an excellent metaphor for the divine manifold; it resembles, of course, very closely, the Neoplatonic doctrine that all the Gods are in each one, which itself goes back to the ancient maxim attributed to the Pythagoreans, that all things are in all things, but in each one in the appropriate fashion.

    These are more important, fundamental doctrines than what Plutarch or other ancient thinkers say about daimons in the God’s series, though those doctrines have their place as well. I wouldn’t take them in such a way as to claim that a person is dealing, not with the God, but with a daimon in their place, which I think would be harmful, and I would resist as well, but rather that one’s mode of worship generates a daimonic presence that embodies one’s way of relating to one’s Gods. This daimon, I would say, since daimons are divine souls, is in a sense the soul animating one’s worship. In any case, there are reasons for the concept of daimons in the series of the God, and I wouldn’t dismiss it on account of issues it isn’t really intended to address.

    • Thank you for the clarification Edward regarding the daimon animating one’s worship. I am still not entirely clear about the subject but it does seem to be a distinction from what I have seen being talked about. So then I would imagine that this daimon that the worship manifests would be more like a kind of divine attendant to the mode of worship rather than a being taking the place in representation of the god.

      I very much love the concept of Indra’s Net myself, not only for causing me to expound on my own ideas about the gods individually as I have in this post, but also in how I relate to other gods, often through their own relationship to my relationship with Apollon-Siva as essentially being tied to him and a part of his divine functions. It is a good way for a devoted individual to really connect to numerous gods while still finding the center of their devotion in the god that they are devoted to.

  3. Of course it is worth considering that the Rig Veda hymns depict Agni as the intercessor, committing thoughts and prayers to the gods through the mode of spiritual fire, which in turn is equated closely with the mind, perception and ‘logos’ in Platonic and Neo-Platonic doctrines. Agni is also the creator-perceiver-motivator in the elemental world. THAT is a daimon, or an activating principle. Gods like Hermes, Aphrodite and Hestia are obviously in this category as primary intercessors in a belief system where to perceive/interact directly with the gods betokened destruction. Why else did Greek gods usually mythically manifest to humans and nymphs etc as animals etc – in daemonic disguises? Daimons are like branches of the ‘tree’ of divine spiritual light: Humans are the leaves manifesting the intrusion of spirit into matter, and daimones connect them to the main trunks of the gods. Many branches, fewer trunks. These ‘branches’ are fixed and formalised.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s