Della materia spirituale dell'arte/On the Spiritual Matter of Art, 2019

"Logos", in Pietromarchi B. (ed.), Della materia spirituale dell'arte, Roma MAXXI Museo nazionale delle arti del XXI secolo, 17 ottobre 2019 - 8 marzo 2020 / On the Spiritual Matter of Art, Rome MAXXI National Museum of the 21st Century Arts, 17 october 2019- 8 march 2020, Roma: Quodlibet 2019, 57-65

The theory of Logos gradually developed in its meaning. As the audible or perceptible sound of a word is the expression of an imperceptible thought or idea, so the visible universe is the expression of the ideal universe or the universe in. a thought form existing in the Divine mind. This ideal Creation or concept of the universe, or type of the universe in the Divine mind, was the Logos, The identity of the Logos with educator and culture, whereas the Jewish, Greek, Hindu, and Buddhist philosophers met and interchanged thoughts and philosophical religious ideas. Greek philosophers called the divine Word Logos. The theory of Logos first originated with Heraclitus, one of the earliest Greek philosophers, who lived from 500 to 440 BC he believed that fire was the primitive element of the phenomenal universe, he postulated some power, force, or Jaw, which controlled the material element fire. He called that power Logos which is reason or order. Hinduism has adopted several iconic symbols, forming part of Hindu iconography, that are imbued with spiritual meaning based on either the scriptures or cultural traditions. The exact significance accorded to any of the icons varies with the followers' region, period, and denomination. Over time some of the symbols for instance the Swastika have come to have wider associations while others like Aum [OM] are recognized as unique representations of Hinduism. Other aspects of Hindu iconography are covered by the terms murti, for icons and mudra for gestures and positions of the hands and body. Om (Aum) ; Om (or Aum, ॐ) is the sacred sound symbol that represents the Universe; the ultimate reality (Brahman). It is prefixed and sometimes suffixed to all Vedic mantras and prayers. Aum is often said to represent God in the three aspects of Brahman (A), Vishnu (U) and Shiva (M). As the Divine primordial vibration, it represents the one ultimate reality, underlying and encompassing all of nature and all of existence. The written syllable ॐ called Omkara serves as a deeply significant and distinctly recognizable symbol for Hindu dharma. The pronunciation of Aum moves through all possible human linguistic vowel sounds and is different from the pronunciation of Om. Both are often symbolically equated, although they are sonically distinct. Indeed "OM" is this sound that was realized by the Vedic Rishis (the ancient seers, sages and yogis) through their peer search (by the inner eye) of the sublime world and which is now being conceived (with the help of high-tech Vedic Symbols telescopes and supercomputers) by the modern researchers as the 'music of creation'. It is further mentioned in the science of yoga that the sound 'a' starts in our chests at the heart centre (Anahata Chakra), moves upward with the 'o' sound in the throat centre (Vishuddha Chakra), and ends with the sound 'OM' (mmmm), which vibrates the higher centres in the head. Thus, it represents and enhances the upward movement of prañic energy along the spine that occurs as we progress in our practice. Meanings of "OM" the letter 'a' symbolizes the conscious or waking state, 'u' the dream state, and the letter 'OM' the dreamless deep sleep (trance like) state of the mind and spirit. The entire symbol stands for the "realization of man's divinity within himself." Analogous desperation is also applied to the geometric shape of Omkara. Spectral analysis of the gross sound of OM and its decompositions and simultaneous analysis of the brain impulses and bio-energy waves while meditating upon this sacred sound would give new dimensions to modern scientific research, thus unfolding the annals of the secret knowledge of the Vedas. Swastika; The swastika is a symbol connoting general auspiciousness. It may represent the purity of soul, truth, and stability or Surya, the sun. Its rotation in four directions has been used to represent many ideas, but primarily describes the four directions, the four Vedas and their harmonious whole. Its use in Hinduism dates back to ancient times. the Vedic symbol of the swastika. The term swastika emanates from the Sanskrit

nature and logos W i l l i a m S . H a m r i c k J a n V a n d e r V e k e n A W h i t e h e a d i a n K e y t o M e r l e a u -P o n t y ' s F u n d a m e n t a l T h o u g h t This page intentionally left blank.

2023

The Logos, (Greek-ΛΟΓΟΣ) derives from Heraclitus of Ephesus, (c.540–c.480 BC) the ancient Greek pre-Socratic philosopher, who used the term in a philosophic way to mean the word, reason, ground but in essence, it hides a profound and distinct meaning in that it laid the foundation for the pathway of a rationale between philosophy and the physical structure of the universe. Other early philosophers, the meaning was used to imply the one major and prime principle and commanding energy that gives potentiality to maintain an unfolding structure of the world around them, that they then would come to understand as reality. The human desire to search the intricacies of the universe, ultimately reveals our own identity and place within the cosmos.

This paper explores and reviews the various forms of sacred geometry and geometrical patterns in religious and occult art used as a means of spiritual progression. The inspirations and myths behind these figures, the supposed powers accorded by them and other such mystical aspects will be examined. The idea is to understand the universal mystical ideas associated with geometrical figures within multiple religious frameworks.

History of Religions 1985, 24: 345-368., 1985

Icons and the Liturgy, East and West

The word logos generally refers to the (spoken) word, though it should be borne in mind that this does not mean a single word but the combination of several words. An ancient encyclopaedia entry-the 100 th of the pseudo-Platonic Definitions-defines logos as "a voice in signs that can name every single thing that exists" (Horoi). The verb belonging to logos is legein, it designates speaking as well as picking up or collecting. Thus, logos can be understood as selecting and meaningfully compiling. This in turn shows that logos as an assembly or "interweaving" (Plato) of words can refer to a narrative, a sentence, a speech or an argument as well as to a proportion or a measure. In Early Greek thought, Heraclitus uses logos to refer to an entity that holds together the conflicting forces of the cosmos. In Platonic-Aristotelian philosophy, as with the Sophists, one can observe the discussion of various kinds of logoi to which truth and falsity are attributed. In the Stoa, the logos becomes the (materially conceived) divine, which determines everything in the world completely rationally. In ancient Christian literature, which was strongly influenced by Neoplatonism, logos finally appears in the "event of Jesus Christ" (Bultmann) as "the WORD", as the divine demand that reveals itself to mankind. The outstanding significance of the various conceptions of logos in European intellectual history is apparent not least in the critique of logocentrism, as formulated above all in the 20 th century.

A. Lidov. The Temple Veil as a Spatial Icon Revealing an Image-Paradigm of Medieval Iconography and Hierotopy. ICON, 2014, 7, p. 97-108., 2014

The author argues that the imagery of the Sacred Veil separating the Holy from the Holy of Holies at the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem was a very powerful spatial icon which considerably influenced art and culture of the Byzantine world and the Latin West. The paper deals with new approaches to the history of art, and the crisis in traditional methodology which does not work in some cases. First of all, it concerns the concept of hierotopy (the creation of sacred spaces), recently proposed by the author of this paper and elaborated in several publications by the international group of scholars (www.hierotopy.ru). These studies have revealed an important theoretical issue. In many cases the discussion of visual culture can not be reduced to a positivist description of artifacts, or to the analysis of theological notions. Some phenomena can be properly interpreted only on the level of “image-paradigms”, which do not coincide with the illustrative pictures or ideological conceptions. This special notion seems a useful instrumentum studiorum, which helps to explain a layer of phenomena. That image-paradigm was not connected with the illustration of any specific text, though it was a part of a continuum of literary and symbolic meanings and associations. This type of imagery is quite distinct from what one could call an iconographic device. At the same time the image-paradigm belonged to visual culture, it was visible and recognizable, but it was not formalized in any fixed state, either in a form of the pictorial scheme or in a mental construction. In this respect the image-paradigm looks similar to the metaphor that loses its sense in retelling, or in its deconstruction into parts. It does not concern any mystic but a special type of consciousness, which determined several symbolic structures as well as numerous concrete pictorial motives; it challenges our fundamental methodological approach to the image as illustration and flat picture.

Graphisme en France, 2017

If visual languages are only a more complex version and therefore are more adapted to our current world of corporate logotypes from the golden age of modernism, they all share the same need for adhesion, the same performative logic, and perhaps the same relation with power. What roles do our visual systems really play in our immediate environment? What do we invest them with daily? In which way do they participate in the social and cultural construction of our visual environment? If the contemporary approaches to visual studies tend to look at how images “act” and their performative capacity, and if it is established that the logotype is a form that discourse takes when it wants to “create an image,” it seems relevant to question the place that these symbols take in our world, and the way in which they can represent — present again, while being invested with their own authority and legality. Logology, literally the “science of discourse,” a slightly ironic nod to its Greek root, can also by understood as the science of logotypes, if we at least remember, that the completely visual way in which this eye is presented to us, remains fundamentally double, contrary or reinforced — whichever the case may be — by discourse’s own logic. With the double meaning of logotype and discourse, what does logos really mean?