Fled to Rome following
proceedings
brought against him for
serious dissent about dogmatic theology
?
serious dissent about dogmatic theology
?
Bruno-Cause-Principle-and-Unity
?
?
-?
?
.
20 Ibid.
, III, ?
?
.
xxiv
? Introduction
? (whose link with our imagination can be taken for granted) is indistin- guishable from the passive aspect of our consciousness. It is this faculty which may or may not allow the establishment of the demonic vinculum, depending on how much resistance the cognitive faculties are able to offer. According to the infinite diversity of physical constitutions and to the qual- ity of the spirit which we can artificially (and sometimes wrongfully) mod- ify, for example through certain foods or particular ointments, it is possi- ble for a spirit to take control of us, attracted by our own melancholic humour, just as the world-soul can be attracted by a matter which is dis- posed to receive a certain influence. The demon thus becomes the cause of our deception, making appear as real what are simply ghosts of our imagi- nation and even giving us the illusion of entering into contact with divini- ties who are also imaginary. On this basis, in On Magic and Theses on Magic, Bruno posits two types of humanity, one superior and one inferior to the general level of mankind, who are distinguished by their ability (or lack thereof) to monitor and direct the processes of our consciousness and in particular its inevitably passive aspect. This, of course, is one of the con- stant themes of his philosophy and in particular of his polemic against the Reformation. In addition, it illustrates his belief that real processes and cognitive processes have a common foundation which has a magical aspect. Since the publication of Sigillus sigillorum (The Figure of Figures), he had been proclaiming, in overtly religious terminology, the essential value of a regulata fides (regulated faith), that is, the importance of exercising con- scious control over our receptive faculties. In this way, he argues against those 'qui aguntur potius quam agant' (who are acted on rather than act). 21
Bruno distinguishes between two types of contraction achievable by man. Contraction is a phenomenon through which the soul, by concentrating on itself, can realize particular powers; but this can have an opposite effect if it is directed towards a higher contemplative level or if it is carried out so as to render us no longer masters but servants of our imagination, and thus exposed to demonic influence. Here Bruno echoes Ficino in his exemplification of var- ious types of contraction; but instead of calling them 'vacationes animi', as Ficino had done, he gives them a name which allows him to incorporate this phenomenon into the metaphysical structure governing our consciousness. 22
21 Op. lat. , II, III, ? ? ? .
22 M. Ficino, Theologia Platonica, XIII, ? , in Opera, (Basel, ? ? ? ? ) I, ? ? ? -? . Cf. Op. lat. , II, II, ? ? ? -? ? ;
the distinction between two opposite types of contractio is connected to the distinction between two types of melancholy. Cf. on this point R. Klibansky, E. Panofsky, F. Saxl, Saturn and Melancholy (London: Nelson, ? ? ? ? ).
? xxv
Introduction
? The point of distinction between the two forms of contraction is therefore represented by the intermediate cognitive faculties which turn the data of sensibility into figments of our imagination. This distinction, and the sep- aration into two distinct levels of humanity, find their exemplary expres- sion in the Cabala del cavallo pegaseo (The Cabala of Pegasus) and in The Heroic Frenzies. The Cabala outlines the characteristics of the man who, faced with the difficulty of searching for the divine, freely renounces his superior faculties, those which make us really human, and contracts his cognitive powers into the single one of hearing, to passive reception alone. Thus stripped of all power of judgment and reduced to the animal condi- tionofanass,hecannolongertellifhisriderisagodorademon-anallu- sion to a famous line from Luther's De servo arbitrio, aimed at denying the very possibility of our freedom. This is the reason why, in The Heroic Frenzies, he praises the 'divine seal' of the 'good contraction'. 23 We have seen that, in this work,24 the metaphysics of Cause are translated in terms of the highest experience which man can have, of contemplation of the divine by means of an adequate image of it. Bruno claims, however, that this can be attained only by someone whose mind is constrained by two bonds (vincula): love, and the highest intelligible species which divinity could present to his eyes (i. e. beauty and the goodness of nature). In rela- tion to the action of these two vincula, the 'divine seal' of the 'good con- traction' acquires an essential importance: divinity, in fact, yields and com- municates itself to us only at a level proportionate to our receptivity of it. Therefore, it is always our responsibility to intervene in the passive moment of our consciousness so as to raise ourselves above that moment, actualizing the infinite potency which is within us.
This leads Bruno back to the distinction between two types of human- ity, those who fall victim to demonic deception and those who, rising above the level of the multitude, overturn the scale of values in which humanity believes and set out to attain the level of a heroic humanity. A fascination with the Epicurean ethic which was already present in The Heroic Frenzies25 appears here, in the works on magic, although this is a sophisti- cated Epicureanism that emphasizes the superiority of the learned man over every event. This man attains a different kind of mind - in fact, a different kind of spirit - and goes to meet a different destiny, while for the others, those who descend below the level of the mass of humanity, the
23 Dialoghi, ? ? ? -? . 24 Dialoghi, ? ? ? . But cf. ibid. ? ? ? ? -? . 25 Op. lat. , III, ? ? ? . Cf. Dialoghi, ? ? ? ? -? ? .
? xxvi
Introduction
? servitude of their own imagination can become a real hell on earth and can be indefinitely prolonged through reincarnation. 26 With De vinculis in genere (A General Account of Bonding), however, we seem to encounter a different picture of the fundamental problems discussed so far. The magus is acquainted with the dynamics not only of magic but also of demonic action, and knows how demons can take possession of us through unguarded avenues, and this opens up to him a new field of action, per- mitting him to link other men to himself and, in fact, to establish a whole series of magical bonds between himself and others. The moral problem raised by magic in general seems to take on a new aspect here. At the begin- ning of On Magic, Bruno examines the stereotypical moral objections which are advanced against magic in general, and against 'mathematical' magic in particular. His reply is equally traditional: magic understood as pure knowledge, as scientia, is always positive but it can be used well or badly, for good or evil, depending on who sets it to work. All this could be equally applied to Bonding; however, there seems to be a new element here which may raise a question, if not about the nature of Bruno's philosophy, then certainly about several of its characteristic features. This is a philoso- phy aimed at liberating man from the fear of death and of the gods, point- ing the way to an escape from the snares which demons use to catch us. And yet here we find talk of the establishment of occult snares designed to put one man in the power of another, making the latter a kind of demon with the power to take possession of the other's spirit. It should be added that none of the effects attainable by man seems to be excluded from the scope of an action which, far from limiting itself to mere rhetoric, is meant to infiltrate every sphere of civil life. Certainly, Bruno's terminology contin- ues to be traditionally magical; even Campanella was later to write a Bonding of his own in De sensu rerum (On Sensation in Things). It should be added that Bruno was an heir, albeit in his own original way, to one of the most important (and most fruitful) aspects of Italian speculation in the ? ? ? ? s, namely the unprejudiced and often brutal observation of reality that is to be found in writings from Machiavelli to Cardano. There is still a tension here between Bruno's radically aristocratic vision and the fact that his work deals with what he believes are laws of nature, which provide no barriers in principle to universal ascent.
Bruno claims that the vinculum in itself is neither good nor evil, but the
? 26 Cf. on this topic R. Klein, L'enfer de Ficin, La forme et l'intelligible. Ecrits sur la Renaissance et l'art moderne (Paris: Gallimard, ? ? ? ? ), ? ? -? ? ? .
xxvii
Introduction
? fact remains that it presupposes a will to act on the part of the agent and a predisposition in the consciousness of the other person to be acted on in an occult and imperceptible way. All the bonds, he tells us, can be reduced to the bond of love, and this gives rise to a series of extremely acute observa- tions which primarily affect the idea of beauty as conceived by the Platonists. They are observations which appear also to reveal a sort of intol- erance towards a philosophical tradition which divided nature into diverse faculties, in particular the tradition which divided human nature into intel- lect and will. The vinculum, he says, is not found in the visible species, but what renders it active and often detrimental to us is something of which we are not aware, although it is sentient and active within us. It is precisely the difficulty of defining a single essence of love, of beauty and of pleasure which indicates to us that there are many different ways in which we can link with (vincere) the soul of the other. In order to put this binding process into action, we require a knowledge of the infinite variety of subjective and objective factors (beginning with the diversity of physical constitutions) in relation to which the vinculum must be prepared in advance in order to be effective. These elements, however, given that they exist in infinitely var- ied individual configurations, cannot be reliably specified in any given case. In this, they recall some of the central theses of Brunian metaphysics.
When Bruno outlines in De immenso the contemplation worthy of the perfect human being,27 he takes inspiration from the image which he has of the divinity. The divinity is a matter which creates all and becomes all; thus, the perfect human being is one who, by elevating himself to the infi- nite in contemplation of the divine, actualizing in the infinite his cognitive potency, is capable of assimilating everything because he knows how to transform himself into it. The excellence of this magnum miraculum which is man is not taken for granted at the outset but rather constitutes a point of arrival and a final achievement. It coincides with the process of human deification, made possible by man's capacity to become, in some sense, omniformis, like divinity. It is therefore significant that, in Bonding, the metaphysical conclusions of Cause are taken up - the identity of facere and fieri, of the potency of creating and being created.
This metaphysical view not only implies that there exists no spiritual world which is separated from its corporeal support, but also implies that reality is unique, and this has important consequences for the psychologi- cal possibility of magical action. 28 This general scheme provides for two
27 Op. lat. , I, I, ? ? ? -? . 28 Op. lat. , III, ? ? ? -? . Cf. Dialoghi, ? ? ? and ? ? ? . xxviii
? Introduction
? constituent moments, one active and one passive, where the latter has to be modified in order to make the former operational. Now, the mid-point between these two moments is, in fact, the vinculum, that which links to an ever-changing degree the operator (the vinciens) to the vinciendum. The original unity of the All, therefore, establishes the conditions for the suc- cess of magical action, because it allows us to understand how a magus can restore an existing apparent multiplicity to its underlying unity. Human beings, too, are presented as matter over whose surface pass infinite forms, and clearly each one of them is a vinculum, one of the many which we all, in fact, encounter. If we can give the right form to things we encounter, we can begin to operate on them according to the same magical scheme which we have found to be in operation on every other level of nature. This process can be guided artificially but does not go beyond the framework of nature, since it does no more than encapsulate in a unique form what are the guiding laws of nature itself. Once again, this is the myth of metamorphosis, that metamorphosis of all things which made possible on the operational level the recognition of the unity which underlies all things and their development. The action which one exercises on oneself (thus making oneself somehow one's own object) is aimed at transforming oneself into a subject of an ever higher form. Magical action is another instance of the coincidence between act and potency which the supreme contemplator has translated into the ability to become omniformis and which here, because of the potency of the vincula and, in particular, the most powerful of them all (love), is the ability to transform the other by actualizing the potency which is within him. One's action will thus have various levels according to one's capacity to give form to that potency by which one is linked to the vinculum. Finally, at the highest level, the vincu- lum reveals its deepest nature, transforming potency into act, act into potency, whence it follows that the operator is transformed in his turn into an object, and the vinciendum into vinciens.
xxix
Chronology
? ? ? ? Born at Nola, near Naples
? ? ? ? Ordained priest in the Order of Preachers (Dominicans).
Began studies in theology
? ? ? ?
Fled to Rome following proceedings brought against him for
serious dissent about dogmatic theology
? ? ? ? Following several stays in northern Italian cities, went to
Geneva where he became a Calvinist. However, he was charged with defamation and threatened with excommunication. He admitted his guilt and was pardoned
? ? ? ? Having taught at Toulouse, went to Paris. Interested the French court in his theory of memory and maintained con- tact with the court for five years, due to close links with the politiques who supported the King of Navarre. De Umbris Idearum (The Shadows of Ideas) (? ? ? ? ), which was dedicated to Henry ? ? ? , Cantus Circaeus (The Circean Melody) and the Italian play, Candelaio (The Candle Maker), were published during this period
? ? ? ? In England as guest of the French Ambassador to Elizabeth ? , Michel de Castelnau, perhaps entrusted with a political mission. Proposed Copernicanism in public lectures in Oxford, and introduced the philosophical and scientific themes of subsequent works in Italian. Rejected by the acad- emic circles at Oxford, he returned to London where Sigillus Sigillorum (The Figure of Figures) was published
? ? ? ? In London, at the house of Fulke Greville, expounded the Copernican theory in a debate which is echoed in the first of
xxx
Chronology
? his Italian dialogues, La Cena de le Ceneri (The Ash Wednesday Supper). The debate provoked opposition, but did not dam- age his relations with Philip Sidney and the circle of Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester. Bruno later defends himself in the first dialogue of De la Causa, principio e uno [Cause, Principle and Unity]
? ? ? ? -? Published, in London, the Italian dialogues: La Cena de le Ceneri; De la causa, principio e uno; De l'infinito, universo e mondi (The Infinite, the Universe, and Worlds); Lo Spaccio de la bestia trionfante (The Expulsion of the Triumphant Beast); Cabala del Cavallo Pegaseo (The Cabala of Pegasus); Eroici furori (The Heroic Frenzies) - all published by J. Charlewood with an incorrect place of publication. Expulsion and The Heroic Frenzies were dedicated to Sir Philip Sidney
? ? ? ? Returned to Paris, where he found a changed atmosphere which was unfavourable to him. Disputed the one hundred and twenty Articuli de natura et mundo adversus peripateticos (Articles about nature and the world against the Peripatetics) at the College of Cambrai; these articles were rewritten and published at Wittenberg under the title Camoeracensis Acrotismus (? ? ? ? )
? ? ? ? At Wittenberg, where he gave lectures on the Organon
? ? ? ? Published a series of Lullian works
? ? ? ? Went to Prague, then to Helmstedt, where he remained until
April ? ? ? ? , despite disputes with the Lutherans and a new excommunication. De Rerum Principiis (On the Principles of Things) was sketched or finished during this period, and the works on magic, De Magia; Theses de magia, De magia math- ematica (On Magic; Theses on Magic; Mathematical Magic), were completed, together with De Vinculis in genere (A General Account of Bonding)
? ? ? ? Went to Frankfurt to await publication of the three great Latin poems, De Minimo; De Monade; De Immenso (On the Minimal; On Monads; On the Boundless) (Wechel, ? ? ? ? )
? ? ? ? During a second stay at Frankfurt, received an invitation from the Venetian patrician, Giovanni Mocenigo, to go to Venice to teach him the secrets of his art of memory. In Venice dur- ing August, perhaps hoping to get the chair of mathematics
xxxi
Chronology
? left vacant since ? ? ? ? (to which Galileo was subsequently appointed). A climate of hope for toleration prevailed in Europe, and perhaps the teaching of Francesco Patrizi at La Sapienza, Rome, deluded him about the possibility of enjoying a reprieve in Italy
? ? ? ? Imprisoned following three denunciations by Mocenigo to the Holy Office. The Venetian phase of his trial, which is well documented, was thus initiated; Bruno defended him- self, claiming that his teaching was purely philosophical, that he was penitent and was prepared to renounce his errors
? ? ? ? Confined in the Roman jail of the Holy Office; the Roman Inquisition had obtained, with some difficulty, a transfer of the trial from the Venetian Senate
? ? ? ? Following a new denunciation and new depositions, Bruno's position became acute. He re-affirmed the line of defence adopted in Venice and presented a lengthy submission of eighty pages (since lost) which was a turning-point in the trial towards an unfavourable outcome
? ? ? ? A commission of theologians examined his published works which had not previously been used, to censure heretical propositions which they allegedly included and to report them to the trial. Included were propositions concerning the first principles of reality, the necessary connection between an infinite cause and an infinite effect, the conception of the individual soul and its relationship with the world-soul, the motion and soul of the earth, the identification of angels with the stars and of the Holy Spirit with the world-soul, and belief in pre-adamites
? ? ? ? Summary of the trial ready
? ? ? ? After a long interruption, trial re-activated; on the suggestion
of Cardinal Bellarmine, eight heretical propositions were submitted to him for his unconditional repudiation. In a series of petitions and depositions, he claimed that he was agreeable to the renunciation; however, he also became entan- gled in the merits of the incriminating propositions by mak- ing various distinctions. Thus, his position deteriorated until the tribunal required him to acknowledge his errors. On
xxxii
Chronology
? ? ? December, he said he would not agree to retract and that
he did not know what should be retracted
? ? ? ? On ? ? January, Clement ? ? ? ordered that he be condemned
as an 'impenitent, stubborn and obstinate' heretic. The sentence was read to him on ? February; it listed among his errors the denial of transubstantiation, the thesis of the transmigration of souls, the infinity of the world, the eternity of the universe, the allegation that Moses and Christ were magicians and impostors, and belief in pre-adamites. On ? ? February, he was burned alive in Rome at the Campo de' Fiori
xxxiii
Further reading
The Latin works of Bruno are found in Opera latine conscripta, ? vols in ? parts, ed. by F. Fiorentino et al. (Naples: Morano, ? ? ? ? -? ? ), reprinted by Frommann, Stuttgart-bad Cannstatt, ? ? ? ? . The Italian works are collected in Dialoghi italiani. Dialoghi metafisici e dialoghi morali nuovamente ristam- pati con note da G. Gentile, ? rd ed. edited by G. Aquilecchia (Rome and Florence: Sansoni, ? ? ? ? ). Other works by Bruno are Candelaio, ed. by V. Spampanato (Bari: Laterza, ? ? ? ? ); Due dialoghi sconosciuti e due dialoghi noti, ed. by G. Aquilecchia (Rome: Ediz. di Storia e Letteratura, ? ? ? ? ); Praelectiones geometricae e Ars deformationum, (Rome: Ediz. di Storia e Letteratura, ? ? ? ? ). G. Aquilecchia has also provided a critical edition of La Cena de le Ceneri (Turin: Einaudi, ? ? ? ? ), and of De la Causa, principio e uno (Turin: Einaudi, ? ? ? ? ). There is an Italian translation of the Latin poems by C. Monti, Opere latine (Turin: UTET, ? ? ? ? ).
There are bibliographies by V. Salvestrini, Bibliografia di G. Bruno, ? ? ? ? -? ?
? Introduction
? (whose link with our imagination can be taken for granted) is indistin- guishable from the passive aspect of our consciousness. It is this faculty which may or may not allow the establishment of the demonic vinculum, depending on how much resistance the cognitive faculties are able to offer. According to the infinite diversity of physical constitutions and to the qual- ity of the spirit which we can artificially (and sometimes wrongfully) mod- ify, for example through certain foods or particular ointments, it is possi- ble for a spirit to take control of us, attracted by our own melancholic humour, just as the world-soul can be attracted by a matter which is dis- posed to receive a certain influence. The demon thus becomes the cause of our deception, making appear as real what are simply ghosts of our imagi- nation and even giving us the illusion of entering into contact with divini- ties who are also imaginary. On this basis, in On Magic and Theses on Magic, Bruno posits two types of humanity, one superior and one inferior to the general level of mankind, who are distinguished by their ability (or lack thereof) to monitor and direct the processes of our consciousness and in particular its inevitably passive aspect. This, of course, is one of the con- stant themes of his philosophy and in particular of his polemic against the Reformation. In addition, it illustrates his belief that real processes and cognitive processes have a common foundation which has a magical aspect. Since the publication of Sigillus sigillorum (The Figure of Figures), he had been proclaiming, in overtly religious terminology, the essential value of a regulata fides (regulated faith), that is, the importance of exercising con- scious control over our receptive faculties. In this way, he argues against those 'qui aguntur potius quam agant' (who are acted on rather than act). 21
Bruno distinguishes between two types of contraction achievable by man. Contraction is a phenomenon through which the soul, by concentrating on itself, can realize particular powers; but this can have an opposite effect if it is directed towards a higher contemplative level or if it is carried out so as to render us no longer masters but servants of our imagination, and thus exposed to demonic influence. Here Bruno echoes Ficino in his exemplification of var- ious types of contraction; but instead of calling them 'vacationes animi', as Ficino had done, he gives them a name which allows him to incorporate this phenomenon into the metaphysical structure governing our consciousness. 22
21 Op. lat. , II, III, ? ? ? .
22 M. Ficino, Theologia Platonica, XIII, ? , in Opera, (Basel, ? ? ? ? ) I, ? ? ? -? . Cf. Op. lat. , II, II, ? ? ? -? ? ;
the distinction between two opposite types of contractio is connected to the distinction between two types of melancholy. Cf. on this point R. Klibansky, E. Panofsky, F. Saxl, Saturn and Melancholy (London: Nelson, ? ? ? ? ).
? xxv
Introduction
? The point of distinction between the two forms of contraction is therefore represented by the intermediate cognitive faculties which turn the data of sensibility into figments of our imagination. This distinction, and the sep- aration into two distinct levels of humanity, find their exemplary expres- sion in the Cabala del cavallo pegaseo (The Cabala of Pegasus) and in The Heroic Frenzies. The Cabala outlines the characteristics of the man who, faced with the difficulty of searching for the divine, freely renounces his superior faculties, those which make us really human, and contracts his cognitive powers into the single one of hearing, to passive reception alone. Thus stripped of all power of judgment and reduced to the animal condi- tionofanass,hecannolongertellifhisriderisagodorademon-anallu- sion to a famous line from Luther's De servo arbitrio, aimed at denying the very possibility of our freedom. This is the reason why, in The Heroic Frenzies, he praises the 'divine seal' of the 'good contraction'. 23 We have seen that, in this work,24 the metaphysics of Cause are translated in terms of the highest experience which man can have, of contemplation of the divine by means of an adequate image of it. Bruno claims, however, that this can be attained only by someone whose mind is constrained by two bonds (vincula): love, and the highest intelligible species which divinity could present to his eyes (i. e. beauty and the goodness of nature). In rela- tion to the action of these two vincula, the 'divine seal' of the 'good con- traction' acquires an essential importance: divinity, in fact, yields and com- municates itself to us only at a level proportionate to our receptivity of it. Therefore, it is always our responsibility to intervene in the passive moment of our consciousness so as to raise ourselves above that moment, actualizing the infinite potency which is within us.
This leads Bruno back to the distinction between two types of human- ity, those who fall victim to demonic deception and those who, rising above the level of the multitude, overturn the scale of values in which humanity believes and set out to attain the level of a heroic humanity. A fascination with the Epicurean ethic which was already present in The Heroic Frenzies25 appears here, in the works on magic, although this is a sophisti- cated Epicureanism that emphasizes the superiority of the learned man over every event. This man attains a different kind of mind - in fact, a different kind of spirit - and goes to meet a different destiny, while for the others, those who descend below the level of the mass of humanity, the
23 Dialoghi, ? ? ? -? . 24 Dialoghi, ? ? ? . But cf. ibid. ? ? ? ? -? . 25 Op. lat. , III, ? ? ? . Cf. Dialoghi, ? ? ? ? -? ? .
? xxvi
Introduction
? servitude of their own imagination can become a real hell on earth and can be indefinitely prolonged through reincarnation. 26 With De vinculis in genere (A General Account of Bonding), however, we seem to encounter a different picture of the fundamental problems discussed so far. The magus is acquainted with the dynamics not only of magic but also of demonic action, and knows how demons can take possession of us through unguarded avenues, and this opens up to him a new field of action, per- mitting him to link other men to himself and, in fact, to establish a whole series of magical bonds between himself and others. The moral problem raised by magic in general seems to take on a new aspect here. At the begin- ning of On Magic, Bruno examines the stereotypical moral objections which are advanced against magic in general, and against 'mathematical' magic in particular. His reply is equally traditional: magic understood as pure knowledge, as scientia, is always positive but it can be used well or badly, for good or evil, depending on who sets it to work. All this could be equally applied to Bonding; however, there seems to be a new element here which may raise a question, if not about the nature of Bruno's philosophy, then certainly about several of its characteristic features. This is a philoso- phy aimed at liberating man from the fear of death and of the gods, point- ing the way to an escape from the snares which demons use to catch us. And yet here we find talk of the establishment of occult snares designed to put one man in the power of another, making the latter a kind of demon with the power to take possession of the other's spirit. It should be added that none of the effects attainable by man seems to be excluded from the scope of an action which, far from limiting itself to mere rhetoric, is meant to infiltrate every sphere of civil life. Certainly, Bruno's terminology contin- ues to be traditionally magical; even Campanella was later to write a Bonding of his own in De sensu rerum (On Sensation in Things). It should be added that Bruno was an heir, albeit in his own original way, to one of the most important (and most fruitful) aspects of Italian speculation in the ? ? ? ? s, namely the unprejudiced and often brutal observation of reality that is to be found in writings from Machiavelli to Cardano. There is still a tension here between Bruno's radically aristocratic vision and the fact that his work deals with what he believes are laws of nature, which provide no barriers in principle to universal ascent.
Bruno claims that the vinculum in itself is neither good nor evil, but the
? 26 Cf. on this topic R. Klein, L'enfer de Ficin, La forme et l'intelligible. Ecrits sur la Renaissance et l'art moderne (Paris: Gallimard, ? ? ? ? ), ? ? -? ? ? .
xxvii
Introduction
? fact remains that it presupposes a will to act on the part of the agent and a predisposition in the consciousness of the other person to be acted on in an occult and imperceptible way. All the bonds, he tells us, can be reduced to the bond of love, and this gives rise to a series of extremely acute observa- tions which primarily affect the idea of beauty as conceived by the Platonists. They are observations which appear also to reveal a sort of intol- erance towards a philosophical tradition which divided nature into diverse faculties, in particular the tradition which divided human nature into intel- lect and will. The vinculum, he says, is not found in the visible species, but what renders it active and often detrimental to us is something of which we are not aware, although it is sentient and active within us. It is precisely the difficulty of defining a single essence of love, of beauty and of pleasure which indicates to us that there are many different ways in which we can link with (vincere) the soul of the other. In order to put this binding process into action, we require a knowledge of the infinite variety of subjective and objective factors (beginning with the diversity of physical constitutions) in relation to which the vinculum must be prepared in advance in order to be effective. These elements, however, given that they exist in infinitely var- ied individual configurations, cannot be reliably specified in any given case. In this, they recall some of the central theses of Brunian metaphysics.
When Bruno outlines in De immenso the contemplation worthy of the perfect human being,27 he takes inspiration from the image which he has of the divinity. The divinity is a matter which creates all and becomes all; thus, the perfect human being is one who, by elevating himself to the infi- nite in contemplation of the divine, actualizing in the infinite his cognitive potency, is capable of assimilating everything because he knows how to transform himself into it. The excellence of this magnum miraculum which is man is not taken for granted at the outset but rather constitutes a point of arrival and a final achievement. It coincides with the process of human deification, made possible by man's capacity to become, in some sense, omniformis, like divinity. It is therefore significant that, in Bonding, the metaphysical conclusions of Cause are taken up - the identity of facere and fieri, of the potency of creating and being created.
This metaphysical view not only implies that there exists no spiritual world which is separated from its corporeal support, but also implies that reality is unique, and this has important consequences for the psychologi- cal possibility of magical action. 28 This general scheme provides for two
27 Op. lat. , I, I, ? ? ? -? . 28 Op. lat. , III, ? ? ? -? . Cf. Dialoghi, ? ? ? and ? ? ? . xxviii
? Introduction
? constituent moments, one active and one passive, where the latter has to be modified in order to make the former operational. Now, the mid-point between these two moments is, in fact, the vinculum, that which links to an ever-changing degree the operator (the vinciens) to the vinciendum. The original unity of the All, therefore, establishes the conditions for the suc- cess of magical action, because it allows us to understand how a magus can restore an existing apparent multiplicity to its underlying unity. Human beings, too, are presented as matter over whose surface pass infinite forms, and clearly each one of them is a vinculum, one of the many which we all, in fact, encounter. If we can give the right form to things we encounter, we can begin to operate on them according to the same magical scheme which we have found to be in operation on every other level of nature. This process can be guided artificially but does not go beyond the framework of nature, since it does no more than encapsulate in a unique form what are the guiding laws of nature itself. Once again, this is the myth of metamorphosis, that metamorphosis of all things which made possible on the operational level the recognition of the unity which underlies all things and their development. The action which one exercises on oneself (thus making oneself somehow one's own object) is aimed at transforming oneself into a subject of an ever higher form. Magical action is another instance of the coincidence between act and potency which the supreme contemplator has translated into the ability to become omniformis and which here, because of the potency of the vincula and, in particular, the most powerful of them all (love), is the ability to transform the other by actualizing the potency which is within him. One's action will thus have various levels according to one's capacity to give form to that potency by which one is linked to the vinculum. Finally, at the highest level, the vincu- lum reveals its deepest nature, transforming potency into act, act into potency, whence it follows that the operator is transformed in his turn into an object, and the vinciendum into vinciens.
xxix
Chronology
? ? ? ? Born at Nola, near Naples
? ? ? ? Ordained priest in the Order of Preachers (Dominicans).
Began studies in theology
? ? ? ?
Fled to Rome following proceedings brought against him for
serious dissent about dogmatic theology
? ? ? ? Following several stays in northern Italian cities, went to
Geneva where he became a Calvinist. However, he was charged with defamation and threatened with excommunication. He admitted his guilt and was pardoned
? ? ? ? Having taught at Toulouse, went to Paris. Interested the French court in his theory of memory and maintained con- tact with the court for five years, due to close links with the politiques who supported the King of Navarre. De Umbris Idearum (The Shadows of Ideas) (? ? ? ? ), which was dedicated to Henry ? ? ? , Cantus Circaeus (The Circean Melody) and the Italian play, Candelaio (The Candle Maker), were published during this period
? ? ? ? In England as guest of the French Ambassador to Elizabeth ? , Michel de Castelnau, perhaps entrusted with a political mission. Proposed Copernicanism in public lectures in Oxford, and introduced the philosophical and scientific themes of subsequent works in Italian. Rejected by the acad- emic circles at Oxford, he returned to London where Sigillus Sigillorum (The Figure of Figures) was published
? ? ? ? In London, at the house of Fulke Greville, expounded the Copernican theory in a debate which is echoed in the first of
xxx
Chronology
? his Italian dialogues, La Cena de le Ceneri (The Ash Wednesday Supper). The debate provoked opposition, but did not dam- age his relations with Philip Sidney and the circle of Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester. Bruno later defends himself in the first dialogue of De la Causa, principio e uno [Cause, Principle and Unity]
? ? ? ? -? Published, in London, the Italian dialogues: La Cena de le Ceneri; De la causa, principio e uno; De l'infinito, universo e mondi (The Infinite, the Universe, and Worlds); Lo Spaccio de la bestia trionfante (The Expulsion of the Triumphant Beast); Cabala del Cavallo Pegaseo (The Cabala of Pegasus); Eroici furori (The Heroic Frenzies) - all published by J. Charlewood with an incorrect place of publication. Expulsion and The Heroic Frenzies were dedicated to Sir Philip Sidney
? ? ? ? Returned to Paris, where he found a changed atmosphere which was unfavourable to him. Disputed the one hundred and twenty Articuli de natura et mundo adversus peripateticos (Articles about nature and the world against the Peripatetics) at the College of Cambrai; these articles were rewritten and published at Wittenberg under the title Camoeracensis Acrotismus (? ? ? ? )
? ? ? ? At Wittenberg, where he gave lectures on the Organon
? ? ? ? Published a series of Lullian works
? ? ? ? Went to Prague, then to Helmstedt, where he remained until
April ? ? ? ? , despite disputes with the Lutherans and a new excommunication. De Rerum Principiis (On the Principles of Things) was sketched or finished during this period, and the works on magic, De Magia; Theses de magia, De magia math- ematica (On Magic; Theses on Magic; Mathematical Magic), were completed, together with De Vinculis in genere (A General Account of Bonding)
? ? ? ? Went to Frankfurt to await publication of the three great Latin poems, De Minimo; De Monade; De Immenso (On the Minimal; On Monads; On the Boundless) (Wechel, ? ? ? ? )
? ? ? ? During a second stay at Frankfurt, received an invitation from the Venetian patrician, Giovanni Mocenigo, to go to Venice to teach him the secrets of his art of memory. In Venice dur- ing August, perhaps hoping to get the chair of mathematics
xxxi
Chronology
? left vacant since ? ? ? ? (to which Galileo was subsequently appointed). A climate of hope for toleration prevailed in Europe, and perhaps the teaching of Francesco Patrizi at La Sapienza, Rome, deluded him about the possibility of enjoying a reprieve in Italy
? ? ? ? Imprisoned following three denunciations by Mocenigo to the Holy Office. The Venetian phase of his trial, which is well documented, was thus initiated; Bruno defended him- self, claiming that his teaching was purely philosophical, that he was penitent and was prepared to renounce his errors
? ? ? ? Confined in the Roman jail of the Holy Office; the Roman Inquisition had obtained, with some difficulty, a transfer of the trial from the Venetian Senate
? ? ? ? Following a new denunciation and new depositions, Bruno's position became acute. He re-affirmed the line of defence adopted in Venice and presented a lengthy submission of eighty pages (since lost) which was a turning-point in the trial towards an unfavourable outcome
? ? ? ? A commission of theologians examined his published works which had not previously been used, to censure heretical propositions which they allegedly included and to report them to the trial. Included were propositions concerning the first principles of reality, the necessary connection between an infinite cause and an infinite effect, the conception of the individual soul and its relationship with the world-soul, the motion and soul of the earth, the identification of angels with the stars and of the Holy Spirit with the world-soul, and belief in pre-adamites
? ? ? ? Summary of the trial ready
? ? ? ? After a long interruption, trial re-activated; on the suggestion
of Cardinal Bellarmine, eight heretical propositions were submitted to him for his unconditional repudiation. In a series of petitions and depositions, he claimed that he was agreeable to the renunciation; however, he also became entan- gled in the merits of the incriminating propositions by mak- ing various distinctions. Thus, his position deteriorated until the tribunal required him to acknowledge his errors. On
xxxii
Chronology
? ? ? December, he said he would not agree to retract and that
he did not know what should be retracted
? ? ? ? On ? ? January, Clement ? ? ? ordered that he be condemned
as an 'impenitent, stubborn and obstinate' heretic. The sentence was read to him on ? February; it listed among his errors the denial of transubstantiation, the thesis of the transmigration of souls, the infinity of the world, the eternity of the universe, the allegation that Moses and Christ were magicians and impostors, and belief in pre-adamites. On ? ? February, he was burned alive in Rome at the Campo de' Fiori
xxxiii
Further reading
The Latin works of Bruno are found in Opera latine conscripta, ? vols in ? parts, ed. by F. Fiorentino et al. (Naples: Morano, ? ? ? ? -? ? ), reprinted by Frommann, Stuttgart-bad Cannstatt, ? ? ? ? . The Italian works are collected in Dialoghi italiani. Dialoghi metafisici e dialoghi morali nuovamente ristam- pati con note da G. Gentile, ? rd ed. edited by G. Aquilecchia (Rome and Florence: Sansoni, ? ? ? ? ). Other works by Bruno are Candelaio, ed. by V. Spampanato (Bari: Laterza, ? ? ? ? ); Due dialoghi sconosciuti e due dialoghi noti, ed. by G. Aquilecchia (Rome: Ediz. di Storia e Letteratura, ? ? ? ? ); Praelectiones geometricae e Ars deformationum, (Rome: Ediz. di Storia e Letteratura, ? ? ? ? ). G. Aquilecchia has also provided a critical edition of La Cena de le Ceneri (Turin: Einaudi, ? ? ? ? ), and of De la Causa, principio e uno (Turin: Einaudi, ? ? ? ? ). There is an Italian translation of the Latin poems by C. Monti, Opere latine (Turin: UTET, ? ? ? ? ).
There are bibliographies by V. Salvestrini, Bibliografia di G. Bruno, ? ? ? ? -? ?
