This painting is very interesting considering how seemingly simple it is. It reminds me of children's play building blocks. Sometimes simple things can be deceptively complex. When you consider that the artist started out with a blank canvass . . . then he created this . . . and darn it, it looks good! It has to do with his color choices, and sense of proportion, and placement. Try to imagine yourself sitting in the same place. What medium do you use? Which brush? What's your technique? What's your vision? What would you come up with? Would it be as interesting? Intriguing?
Intrigue in its original sense meaning "to trick, deceive, cheat," is from French intriguer, from Italian intrigare "to plot meddle; perplex, puzzle," from Latin intricare meaning "entangle, perplex, embarrass." When something is intricate (a form taken directly from Latin intricatus "entangle," from in "in" + tricae "perplexities, hinderances, toys, tricks"), it creates interest, from Latin interesse "to concern, make a difference, be of importance," from inter "between"+ esse "to be." You have to look closer and get in it to see the detail, or solve the mystery. It spikes curiosity and makes us care. Maybe there is a puzzle or game to solve. Interest is the opposite of boredom.
Intrigue in its original sense meaning "to trick, deceive, cheat," is from French intriguer, from Italian intrigare "to plot meddle; perplex, puzzle," from Latin intricare meaning "entangle, perplex, embarrass." When something is intricate (a form taken directly from Latin intricatus "entangle," from in "in" + tricae "perplexities, hinderances, toys, tricks"), it creates interest, from Latin interesse "to concern, make a difference, be of importance," from inter "between"+ esse "to be." You have to look closer and get in it to see the detail, or solve the mystery. It spikes curiosity and makes us care. Maybe there is a puzzle or game to solve. Interest is the opposite of boredom.
God is Omnipresent, which is to be ever everywhere, from omni "all" praesense "present", pre "before" esse/essent "to be". God is Presence. Essence. I AM. This can be an interesting puzzle to contemplate. Exactly who and what is God? Traveling toward extremes can be exciting and interesting, however, this same endeavor can also end up leading to the opposite, i.e., boredom, ennui, or ruin, such as when the investigative genius, like Sherlock, hits a dry spell, or thinks they have solved all the mysteries.
It is interesting, then, that God is an extreme character. Nothing is more extreme than being the Esse, the All, the One. But is God, then, alone (from all "all"+ an "one")? That would be a whole lot of alone. That is a big and fearful void in our eyes, too big, and too small, a vast abyss. Like when you think about the edge of the universe, what is just beyond it? And what is smaller than the smallest particle? … More. Infinity. Eternity. It cannot even be spoken.
Fortunately that's none of my business.
O Lord, my heart is not lifted up; my eyes are not raised too high; I do not occupy myself with things too great and too marvelous for me. But I have calmed and quieted my soul, like a *weaned child with its mother; like a weaned child is my soul. Psalm 131:1-2 [*in the sense of: a child who doesn't cry for milk, who has dealt with the struggle of being weaned.]
So yes, one can go too far thinking about eternity and the eternal, but really the problem comes down to a fearful simplicity, or the prospect of an eternal boredom, getting stuck in an endless monotony (from Latin monos "single, alone"+ tone) where nothing interesting happens, everything is seen, there is no complexity or mystery. That is just hellish.
But where is the place of of interest if you can't find it by striving, and it is not at the extremes?
The Little Prince, Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
"Be my friends, I am all alone," he said.
"I am all alone--all alone--all alone," answered the echo.
The extremes turn out to be lonely places. The mean is usually more comfortable. Not too high, not too low, not too big not too small, not too dry, not too wet . . . just right."What a queer planet!" he thought. "It is altogether dry, and altogether, pointed, and altogether harsh, and forbidding. And the people have no imagination. They repeat whatever you say to them… On my planet I had a flower, she always was the first to speak…" -ch. 19
Like Goldilocks.
That golden spot is somewhere in-between, in the middle, at the heart of, or at the center. Maybe that's where the eyes naturally go, or you might say the place of interest to the eyes.
Center ring at a circus is the place of greatest interest. Center podium is gold, the first place winner.
Interest is what is inter + esse "be between, among, in the midst of," like the inner tree in the garden (gan "enclosure, garden" in Hebrew, from ganan "to cover, surround, defend") enclosure of Eden. It was the forbidden tree of knowledge . . . and that is partly what made it so interesting.
but God said, "You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst [betawk(tavek)] of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die." Genesis 3:3In Hebrew tavek is "midst, between, inside, within, middle, among, home." The tree was in-between (inter + esse) the garden. Interesting.
The X marks a spot, i.e., the place in the midst of the enclosure. The golden ratio is the proportion often found in nature that we find so pleasing.
The mathematical structure of nature can be intriguing and intricate. It can create organic serpentine shapes, or vast veinous labyrinths to confuse, or entertain the eye, which is pleasing, not boring, robotic or predictable. Amazing, good trick!
Not only does phi φ create interest, it allows for organic movement, flow and structural stability / balance, and that is also beautiful. However, phi is also a little dangerous, which can be interesting too. It is the divine proportion used in creation. Knowledge of the divine is in creation, the knowledge of the good / beautiful and, finally, also the knowledge of chaos / evil that must be tamed and conquered.
Vitruvian Man, Leonardo da Vinci, c. 1490 - made in the image and likeness of God.
In ancient Egypt the concept of balance and harmony was known as ma'at / maat / mat / mayet. Ma'at is usually translated as "truth" or "that which is straight," with the idea of order, balance, and justice. It was against the feather of Ma'at that the deceased's heart was balanced during the Weighing of the Heart Ceremony in the Duat (underworld). After the ceremony, what ensued in the after-ma'at, or after the math (weighing), was either the admittance into paradise [a safe enclosure], or Ammit, i.e., the "devourer," "soul-eater" and destruction; the second death.
Weighing of the Heart, from The Book of the Dead, (to the right)Anubis with Feather of Ma'at in Balance, Thoth Recording, Ammit Waiting.
Ma'at was also the "mat" or stone platform / foundation, that the gods (neteru) stood upon in artwork and statuaries which was an indication of their authority.
Ma'at, and Hawthor seated on a foundation "ma'at"[reproduction], Tomb of Nefertari, Valley of the Queens, 19th dynasty, 1270 BC
Ma'at was the primordial foundation of stability, balance, justice, order and truth, and the foundation of the universe. In the earliest representations a raised platform / plinth was her symbol, latter she came to be represented by the ostrich feather.
One Rendering of Ma'at in hieroglyphic Form- Platform/Foundation ma', Sickle (cut with sickle) ma, Arm (cubit measure) meh + Semicircle (bread, loaf) t ending used to indicate feminine gender + Seated Goddess with Feather of Truth (determinative)
Ma'at was considered to be the counterpart of isfet "injustice, violence, chaos". We might say Isfet is a fit, or was a worthy or fitting (from [perhaps] Middle English fit "an adversary of equal power" related to Old English fitt "conflict, struggle") opponent for Ma'at, personified as the serpent Apep (Apophis, Gk.) "Lord of Chaos" during the Middle Kingdom.
Ma'at was also the "mat" or stone platform / foundation, that the gods (neteru) stood upon in artwork and statuaries which was an indication of their authority.
Ma'at, and Hawthor seated on a foundation "ma'at"[reproduction], Tomb of Nefertari, Valley of the Queens, 19th dynasty, 1270 BC
Ma'at was the primordial foundation of stability, balance, justice, order and truth, and the foundation of the universe. In the earliest representations a raised platform / plinth was her symbol, latter she came to be represented by the ostrich feather.
Ma'at was considered to be the counterpart of isfet "injustice, violence, chaos". We might say Isfet is a fit, or was a worthy or fitting (from [perhaps] Middle English fit "an adversary of equal power" related to Old English fitt "conflict, struggle") opponent for Ma'at, personified as the serpent Apep (Apophis, Gk.) "Lord of Chaos" during the Middle Kingdom.
The two opposite forces balanced each other. Like a hero and nemesis / archenemy / antagonist. There is never a hero without a struggle to overcome. In a certain way the hero is born from the nemesis, as truth / light is born out of chaos / darkness. But the creation of the hero is the destruction of the nemesis, as the creation of order and balance is the destruction of chaos. However evil is never entirely annihilated, although maybe eliminated (from ex "off, out" + limine "threshold." Evil is kicked out, put in its place . . . hell.
Ma'at offered a stable foundation on which to build a home in the surrounding chaos. A secure place of rest . . . but what really is it? Think about what the feather represents. Ma'at is lightness, as a feather that blows in the wind.
Bodies tend toward entropy, yet the foundational building blocks remain.
The wind blows where it wills, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes; so it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit. John 3:8The truth, the "firm" foundation of everything, is really not a solid thing, it is rather an idea or a state of being, a finesse, from French finesse "fineness, subtlety," from Old French fin "subtle, delicate; perfected, highest quality," or maybe we could say, an achievement of the fin "end, conclusion" of esse "being" (as in the aim, purpose, target); a certain purity (which when found within will be manifested externally as well).
The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed, nor will they say, "Behold, here it is!" or "There!" for behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst / within you (entos "within, inside"). Luke 17:20-21The solidity around us that we know as matter, and reality is really a lot of empty space. Think of atoms or the smallest of small most simple particles. What are they? Is there not yet another universe inside of them? It's tricky. How can they make this solid world around us that we believe to be so sure, that we perceive with our senses? We think we are really touching, seeing and hearing what is there, but it is actually just an interpretation of energy by the organ of our brains. Regardless of of exactly how un-solid reality actually is, still we are standing here made out of it. So for all practical intents and purposes we can say we do touch, see and hear what is actually outside of us. This is a balanced perspective. We don't need to deny the reality of reality, but neither should we deny the nature of reality… even if it is not entirely comfortable.
Bodies tend toward entropy, yet the foundational building blocks remain.
So, finally, it seems to be, that the apparently irrational, magical or unreal is actually the foundation for the rational, logical and real.
People use tricks of design like phi to make the structures pleasing, or interesting to the eye as well as for the sake of stability. Columns witch support the structure have bases or foundations, as well as does the whole building which is built upon a foundation.
The Parthenon in Greece is a classic building which displays the use of the golden ratio. Parthenon is from Greek parthenos "maiden, virgin".
People use tricks of design like phi to make the structures pleasing, or interesting to the eye as well as for the sake of stability. Columns witch support the structure have bases or foundations, as well as does the whole building which is built upon a foundation.
The Parthenon in Greece is a classic building which displays the use of the golden ratio. Parthenon is from Greek parthenos "maiden, virgin".
Athena was the patron goddess of Athens. The Parthenon was a temple dedicated to this virgin goddess. Virgin is from Latin virginem (genitive virgo) "maiden, unwed girl, or woman," also used as an adjective meaning "fresh, unused," as in "virgin wool." Virginem is said to be related to virga "young / green shoot, twig, switch." However, we could say that a virgin is also a "free woman," rather than simply being an "unmarried" woman, or a woman who is has not had sexual relations. This idea of "being free" would draw in a connection with vir "man, hero" in Latin, from PIE root *wi-ro- "freeman, man," *uiHro- "freeman"). Perhaps even vir + gyne ("woman" Gk.), a "freeman" who is a "woman," or vir + genesis (Latin "generation, nativity", from Greek gignesthai "to be born, from PIE *gene-/*gen- "give birth, beget")," that is, a person, "created / born" a vir "man" (a human being) in the state of freedom (before or without being married). In the ancient world a woman was her own man, in this sense, until she was married and became the property of her husband.
According to Greek myth, Cecrops [Κέκροψ], the first king of Athens, invented marriage as a punishment for women. Before marriage existed, said the myth, women were the political equals of men, but the institution of marriage imposed limits on their power. Ancient History & Civilization, Erenow.net
And it seems reasonable that the origin of vir as meaning "man" could also be related to virga as well [as virgin]. In that both virgins and freemen are people with potential or vitality like green (young) shoots, and "green" in Latin is viridis. The vir "man" being a "shoot of the earth / ground", or what sprouted or grew out of the mud, i.e., ha'adam / man / mankind.
This gives new meaning to the term "ever virgin."
Not only can a woman be a "freeman" in an unmarried state / virgin, a woman can also be virago, a word meaning "man-like or heroic woman, of extraordinary stature, strength, courage," from Latin virago "female warrior, heroine, amazon," from vir "man." This seems to fit the image of Athena the virtuous virgin.
Pallas Athena, the patron of Athens was goddess of wisdom, courage, inspiration, civilization, law and justice, just warfare, mathematics, strength, strategy, the arts, craft, and skill.
Virtue also comes from Latin vir "man," from Latin virtutem "moral strength, high character, goodness; manliness; valor, bravery, courage (in war), excellence, worth," and can be said of all men (humans), both men (males) and women (females). Virtue is the mean between the vices of excess. It is a balance between the extremes, and freedom from or victory (from victor "conquerer") over vice (from vitium "defect, offense, blemish, imperfection"). Athena is sometimes shown holding the goddess Nike "victory" in the palm of her hand.
Victory over vice is achieved through balance. When things are out of balance compensation, or payment must be made in order to restore balance and restore a state of grace, from Latin gratia "favor, esteem, regard; pleasing quality, good will, gratitude".
Interest (%) as in "a payment made on top of the value of something for its use, or because it was borrowed", is from interest (n.) as being "a legal claim or right; concern; benefit, advantage", ultimately from a form of the Latin interesse "to concern, make a difference, be of importance," from inter "between" + esse "to be." How is this kind of interest % "being between"?
To charge interest is for the advantage or benefit of the lender (interested party) and not necessarily just about just compensation. It does seem that it can be "just" to pay a certain fee for borrowing a persons goods, because they were without those goods for a time, and also, maybe needed to invest time and effort in the lending of their money or goods. But how much compensation is fair compensation? And is a person always put out because of the lending, or is it the case that sometimes the lending doesn't cost the lender any inconvenience? It seems to be the case that a person can take advantage of another person's bad luck for their own advantage.
Advantage, is from Latin ab "from"+ ante "before, in front of, against".
Advantage, is from Latin ab "from"+ ante "before, in front of, against".
Interest payments may benefit, as in "advantage, profit" a lender in a way that turns out to be anything but equitable, and is more like using another human being in an unbalanced or vicious way(or, as in the case above, for the benefit of a harmless prank).
That is why it is called usury (from Latin usura "payment for the use of money, interest", literally "a usage, use, enjoyment", from usus, from uti (utilize, utility). So usury is a usage fee, but it can also turn out to be a using of another's hard luck or disadvantage in an unjust manner. Just because a person is desperate and willing to agree to pay a really high percentage of interest does not make it right. They may have no other option (or they may even just be stupid, or undisciplined). However, to charge a small amount (usage charge) for business doesn't seem to be inequitable, and seems legitimate, balanced, and not to be unjust usury, or abuse, from ab "away" + uti "make use of, profit by, take advantage of, enjoy, apply, consume" of the person who is paying back the fee.
Death and the Miser, Jan Provost, 1515-1521
You shall not lend upon interest to your brother, interest on money, interest on victuals, interest upon anything that is lent for interest. To a foreigner you may lend upon interest… Deut. 23:19-20
There are a lot of strange rules and regulations in the Pentateuch which seem harsh and outdated now. Why would it be fine to "bite" a foreigner? Perhaps it could be that the people first had to learn how it is right to treat a brother(someone whom you care about, and whom you see as being like you) before they could understand how it is right to treat anyone and everyone, since we are ALL brothers, ALL neighbors, and ALL God's children. There actually are not any "foreigners" and therefore no one should be "bitten" or taken advantage of.
Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the robbers' hands? And he said, "The one who showed compassion to him." Then Jesus said to him, "Go and do the same." Luke 10:36-37 NASB
And still even before they could understand how it is not right to "bite" a brother, they themselves were "bitten". So they were able to understand the feeling. When YHWH provided for them in the desert with "the bread of angels" Psalm 78:25, at no cost, they proved themselves to be ungrateful by complaining, rebelling with unfaithful spirits against him. So YHWH decided to treat them like foreigners for a time, rather than his children, and exacted payment from them in the form of interest (neshek) by means of the seraph serpents who "bit (nashak) the people, so that many sons of Israel died."Numbers 21:6
This bitting that is associated with snakes, being related to an "advantage" or "benefit" and therefore usury, may have come from the idea of a snakes who lie in wait for their prey. Perhaps people who are bit by snakes feel like they are also the prey of the snake, and that they've been "taken advantage" of by the sly snakes who hide under cover waiting for an opportunity to strike at the heel.
However the idea that a snake would do this to gain advantage for itself, other than to defend itself, would be personification. Snakes don't actually strike at people because they (snakes) are wicked and enjoy to see people (who are "foreigners" to snake-kind) pay.
It is interesting then that the golden haired boy in "The Little Prince" let himself be bit by a serpent in order to return home. In using his mortal body for "payment", the bite (nashak) of the snake, sent him home. But why was the snake an interested party? What did it benefit from the arrangement? What was its self-interest and gain? . . . Unless it ate him! Think about it, the narrator says his body was not there the next day. . . 🤔😵🤯
What was the interest of the snake in the garden of Eden for that matter? Do they [snakes] just take enjoyment in death? Is it a case of misery loves company? . . . like, "Guess what?". . . "There is NO Santa Claus, na-na-na!"
"There-is-NO-sanc-tu-ary!"
"The Wizard is a man behind a curtain . . ."
Yeah, feel good now, snake?
No, it's hollow; a bottomless pit. Who wants an eternity of that? It doesn't make sense. But it makes sense as an analogy. The snake is an agent of change and change isn't always comfortable, it can be downright terrifying even, but change is sometimes necessary to bring about balance, moving away from the extremes.
It's not good to remain in ignorance as eternal children, however, we don't want to then get to the other side, and see a "Dead End", or even worse a cliff at the edge of an endless abyss. That's scary. It is scary to be at the end and find that you're in a box, not a garden, but a prison.
