/ 
On Symbol and Symbolism in Origen’s Treatise «Contra Celsum»
DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI201663.53-68
Abstract
The article describes a context analysis of terms σUμβολον and τUπος in Origen’s treatise Contra Celsum. The Christian, Gnostic and pagan types of symbolism are distinguished as they are introduced by Origen and his opponent. Each type has its specifi c understanding of symbol in the ontological area, which then is projected onto exegesis of authoritative texts of each tradition. Christian symbolism is traced through various examples of Origen’s commentaries on the Bible to distinguish σUμβολον from τUπος, which are treated as representing “vertical” and “horizontal” relations between referent and denotation. Pagan symbolism is built up from concepts of pagan gods’ veneration and theurgy, with the latter related to the theory of universal sympathy. Gnostic conception of symbols is based on the metaphysical goal of human souls to escape from the fallen universe using symbols (extracted primarily from the text of New Testament and authoritative Gnostic texts) as a ‘key’ or ‘password’ for not to be seized by guarding spirits. Finally, a more subtle distinction is proposed to underline ontologic difference between symbol and allegory as they are based on different types of referent– denotation link. As a result, a generalized outline of Origen’s symbolism is formulated as a series of features distinguishing it from concurrent types of symbolism as well as from typology and allegory in Christian discourse.
Keywords
Origen, Celsus, Symbol, Type, Typology, Allegory, Tropology, Exegetics, Hermeneutics, School of Alexandria, Patristics, Bible studies, Semiotics
References
1. Afonasin E. V. Filosofija Klimenta Aleksandrijskogo (Philosophy of Clemens of Alexandria), Novosibirsk, 1997.
2. Butorina M. I. Traktovka simvola v rannehristianskoj mysli: Dis. … kand. filos. nauk (Symbol Interpretation in Early Christian Thought: Dissertation), Saint-Petersburg, 2005.
3. Danielu Zh. 2005 “Bogoslovie Slova” (Theology of Word), in Bogoslovskij sbornik, Moscow, 2005, vol. 13, pp. 5–29.
4. Ivanov Vjach. Vs. 1999 “Ocherki po predystorii i istorii semiotiki” (Essays on Prehistory and History of Semiotics), in Ego zhe. Izbrannye trudy po semiotike i istorii kul'tury, Moscow, 1999, vol. 1, pp. 605–811.
5. Kuliev O. I. 2015 “Origen protiv Gerakleona. Spor dvuh jekzegetov“ (Origen vs Herakleon. Dispute of Two Exegetes), in Universum platonovskoj mysli: Korpus tekstov Platona v istorii ego interpretacij: Materialy XXII mezhdunarodnoj konferencii, Saint-Petersburg, 2015, pp. 133–138.
6. Kurdybajlo D. S. 2015 “Uchenie Plotina o simpaticheskih svjazjah v kosmologii «Jennead»” (Plotin’s Teacing about Sympathetic Connections in Cosmology of “Enneada”), in Universum platonovskoj mysli: Korpus tekstov Platona v istorii ego interpretacij: Materialy XXII mezhdunarodnoj konferencii, Saint-Petersburg, 2015, pp. 117–123.
7. Losev A. F. Istorija antichnoj jestetiki (History of Antique Esthetics), Moscow, 2000, vol. 8/1.
8. Petrov A. V. Fenomen teurgii (Theourgy Phenomenon), Saint-Petersburg, 2003.
9. Petrov V. V. 2010 “Myslitel'nyj gimn i vozvodjashhaja molitva u Dionisija Areopagita i ego predshestvennikov-neoplatonikov” (Thought Hymn and Elevating Prayer by Dionysius Areopagite and His Forerunners-Neoplatonians), in Kosmos i dusha, Moscow, 2010, vol. 2, pp. 210–239.
10. Svetlov R. V. Gnozis i jekzegetika (Gnosis and Exegetics), Saint-Petersburg, 1998.
11. Svetlov R. V. 2000 “Jamvlih Halkidskij. Metafizika. Kommentarii“ (Iamblichus Chalcidensis. Metaphysics. Commentaries), in Jamvlih Halkidskij. Kommentarii na dialogi Platona, Saint-Petersburg, 2000, pp. 5–32.
12. Serjogin A. V. 2015 “Traktat Origena «O nachalah»” (Origen’s Treatise “De Principiis”), in Filosofskij zhurnal, 2015, vol. 8/2, pp. 44–55.
13. Berkeley D. S. 1978 “Some Misapprehensions of Christian Typology in Recent Literary Scholarship”, in Studies in English Literature, 1500–1900, 1978, vol. 18/1, pp. 3–12.
14. Florovsky G. 1950 “Origen, Eusebius, and the Iconoclastic Controversy”, in Church History, 1950, vol. 19/2, pp. 77–96.
15. Liddell H. G., Scott R. (eds.) A Greek-English Lexicon, Oxford, 1996.
16. Mitchell M. M. 2005 “Patristic Rhetoric on Allegory: Origen and Eustathius Put 1 Samuel 28 on Trial”, in The Journal of Religion, 2005, vol. 85/3, pp. 414–445.
17. Quispel G. 1974 “Origen and Valentinian Gnosis”, in Vigilae Christianae, 1974, vol. 28/1, pp. 29–42.
18. Ramelli I. 2011 “The Philosophical Stance of Allegory in Stoicism and its Reception in Platonism, Pagan and Christian: Origen in Dialogue with the Stoics and Plato”, in International Journal of the Classical Tradition, 2011, vol. 18/3, pp. 335–371.