The Gem as an Object of Perception

Saint Thomas Aquinas, Medieval Thinkers and Objects of Perception

◊◊  Medeival philosophy is getting dissed too much lately, to the annoyance of R.R.

◊◊  It turns out that the medievals had it right all along - they percieved objects in the context of wholeness, rather than getting trapped in the boundaries of perceptionswhich happens all too much today.

◊◊  The beauty of a gem may be the key to remembering  our place in the Universe.

                      

Have you thought lately about the relationship you have with your objects of perception? We need to think about that; philosophers do.  I guess that makes me a philosopher. After studying the great medieval thinkers I come to the conclusion that our relationship with gems, and other objects of observation, needs to be reconsidered. 

Modern western intellectuals look back at medieval philosophy as naïve and primitive. This condescending attitude is depressingly pervasive.  Humberto Eco wrote that medieval aesthetics was “tangled in theology” and Benedetto Croce despaired that “medieval studies…make dull and unhelpful reading.”

Condescension is the wrong attitude to have about the medievals. Consider the immense humanity of Thomas Aquinas. Thinkers of his era, the early Medieval, were immersed in a world of very fine appreciation of material things, without losing the sense of the divine creation in which they were poised.

A 12th century medieval man could not even leave his house without perceiving himself surrounded by signs and symbols of the Divine everywhere he looked.  Alan of Lilli, Monk, poet, preacher, theologian, stated, “Every creature of this earth is like a picture or a book: it is a mirror of ourselves.  It is a faithful mark of our life and of our death, of our condition and our fate.”  Whoa. Mirror of ourselves! That reminds one of the quote from the Upanishads, “I am that, thou art that, all of this is that”. Seeing your innermost highest Self in all objects of perception is just what its all about!

This beautiful quote hints at the sense of belonging and presence that the medievals must have enjoyed.   Can you believe that some intellect-dominated researchers use this quote to label the medieval mentality as “primitive” (Eco, 1988)?  Let’s not dwell on that. We want to learn what exactly were the medieval thinking and seeing.

 

Thinking and Perceiving

The medieval thought that one’s life is lived with detachment and discipline in an ever-increasing path towards achieving the grace of Heaven and union with the Creator. They felt that the objects in the material world were real only to a certain extent; those objects were symbols of the presence of the Divine in their life. Medievals were always intrigued by the higher meaning of things. It was for this reason that books were written called ‘bestiaries’ which were a  form of encyclopedia to describe all of the ‘beasts’ or animals that roamed the earth. However, these encyclopedias were nothing like ours today; these encyclopedias described the animal and the position of this animal in relation to God. The symbolic meaning of the animal dominated rather than the biological.

Books called ‘lapidaries’ were also written. They were about the known gems and precious stones.  Again, the books were not gemological; the gems were explained by their symbolic meaning. The materials of which gems and minerals were composed, their specific gravity and R.I. did not mean a thing to medieval writers! The twelfth and thirteenth century contemporaries of Thomas Aquinas wrote the most exquisite dissertations on the subtle meanings of gemstones, flowers and animals.

Objects had a reality, but only to the extent that that object served in everyday use. The symbolic universe was whole and complete and did not abide scrutiny for scrutiny was of no use to the intuitive medievals.  The moment an attempt to explain the object came up, that thing began to lose its reality.

(Photons are like that too; Heisenberg showed that if you look too close at a photon’s trajectory, you lose its position). Objects were seen as created by God; as the word of God made into object.  God’s message became Nature, intimations of God became everyday things. According to Humberto Eco, “ The world seemed a storehouse of symbols, ruled by a Providence which would not leave man unprovided for but surrounded him with trustworthy signs”.

Gem connoisseurship starts with knowing gemology. Upon that basis, experience will bring maturity to one’s perception of the aesthetics of a gem.  The expectation should be to devote, over a period of years, one’s attention to his or her relationship to the gem.  Sacred texts from many religions speak of the duality of the observer and the observed being melted into a unity; similar to the unity of perception that was briefly enjoyed by the 12th century medievals.  While the price per carat and the certificate of a stone may be important, they pale into perspective when considered in light of the considerations discussed here.

 

Thinkers of the medieval era developed a vast scholastic approach to the perception of beauty, involving the discussion of color, shape, form, essence, intuition, reason and judgment. These are certainly worthy things to spend one’s time on!  “Lyrical intuition” was used by Benedetto Croce as a term to signify that the unity of the object of an intuition was determined by feeling. The importance of feeling is recognized by great thinkers of all ages (except ours).  Feelings are non-verbal and are the abode of intuition.

This is where we revisit the difference between a gemologist and a connoisseur.  Imagine a world where Nature was celebrated, while no one gave any thought to observe or analyse it; this was the medieval approach to the world of material things. Upon seeing a gem, a gemologist wants to observe, measure and verify physical properties while the connoisseur wants to derive an experience from the stone, wants to perceive the gem at its finest level, the level of feeling, where, one could say, it is being celebrated.

Our country seems to be involved in an upsurge of religious and spiritual seeking. Many of us already see life as a series of mysteries, laden with hidden meaning. They see themselves as moving about in a world of connectedness rather than isolation; nature’s perfection surrounds us and leads us on, dropping clues and signs in front of us. The preceding two sentences also describe 12th century medieval thought. Aquinas seemed to live a simple life; one that many in this modern world would like to achieve:

Aquinas: “The universe cannot be better than it is; its good consists in the world order, the most handsome it is and bestowed by God.  For one part to be improved our of recognition would spoil the proportions of the whole design; overstretch one lute string and the melody is lost.”

It is very interesting that our nation is now in the middle of a great controversy in which the position of God in education and science is debated (evolution vs. intelligent design).  Five hundred years ago the same controversy was also central to Italian renaissance culture. The debate was the same – except that then, science won and a materialistic object-related world view took hold. The way of thinking that included a wholeness (or a God) at the world’s core was lost. The renaissance, while great for music, science and art, brought an unhealthy, intellectually dominated separation of observer and observed; a compartmentalization of the continuum of life into parts.  And now you can see the dismal state it has led us to. It is hoped that when this current debate is resolved, the holistic perception wins over the deconstructivists.

Aquinas: “The soul is by its essence in each part of the body…it is clear that the whole of every form is in the whole subject and the whole of it in each part.”

“All form, through which things have being, is a certain participation in the divine clarity”.

Back>>

 

    Alfred Noyes and the Role of Poetry

            in a “Shattered World”

◊◊ It's been about 90 years since a poet has been invited to participate in a scientific event. Ron is starting to get pissed...

◊◊  Gemology's 'Planck Scale' gets defined

◊◊ Ron quotes gemologist Richard Hughes who, in turn, quotes meta-gemologist Dr. Edward Gubelin

             
Anyone that wanted things
Touched the jewel and they came,
We were wealthier than kings
Could we only do the same.

Alfred Noyes

In 1917, upon the unveiling of the new 100-inch telescope at Mount Wilson Observatory, a select group of scientists was invited to witness the event. This brilliant assembly of minds was graced by the presence of the Poet, Alfred Noyes, invited in recognition of the value a poetic perception could add to such an affair. This was perhaps the last time a poet ever got invited to an event of scientific importance. It was also the last time that scientists acknowledged that the deconstructive approach to percieving nature may need the subjective fullness of a poet to “reunite truth with beauty.” Noyes describes this concept in the following lines:

Poetry has its own precision of expression and, in modern times, it has been seeking more and more for truth, sometimes even at the expense of beauty. It may be possible to carry that quest a stage farther, to the point where, in the great rhythmical laws of the universe revealed by science, truth and beauty are reunited. If poetry can do this, it will not be without some value to science itself, and it will be playing its part in the reconstruction of a shattered world.

Science and Subjectivity
In the world of science, subjectivity is looked upon as something to be filtered out of the process of observation and analysis. However, the most elevated and pure science, physics, has followed its probing of matter beyond the Planck Scale to a world that very much resembles the vagaries and unconventionality of pure subjectivity: the quantum field. Its qualities of unboundedness, pure potentiality and the fact that it is even beyond the normal boundaries of space and time, are qualities that resemble the highest and most refined spiritual experiences of mystics the world over. This has caused quite a number of physicists to jump ship. Rather than writing ever more cold scientific essays, many have moved to penning exalted and breathless books that describe the uncanny similarities between recent discoveries in theoretical physics and ancient religious and spiritual descriptions of the mental inner world.

Gemology also has a ‘Planck Scale’ beyond which the intellect and the normal discriminative qualities no longer have any sway. That is the moment the intellect surrenders itself to the primal beauty of a fine and beautiful gemstone.

The usefulness of objectivity as a tool for discovery is well known. This paper however, will explore subjectivity and will suggest that gemology is better suited to deal with subjectivity than many other sciences simply because the focus of our science – gemstones – is by nature the complete expression of the highest subjective qualities: allure, fineness, attraction, timelessness, glamour and charm.

Only now, after 370 years of taking objective, rational science as far as it will go is it finally being realized that the subjective approach to knowledge of the universe has validity.

To quote the clear words of physicist Eddington: “And yet in regard to the nature of things, this knowledge is only an empty shell – a form of symbols. It is knowledge of structural form and not knowledge of content.”

Having quoted Eddington let us now read what gemologist Richard Hughes had to say in a 2003 essay:

Science is gemology’s mind, but the body also needs heart and soul. The heart of our product (the gemstone) is its beauty, its soul the romance surrounding it. Today’s gemology is too often a heartless shell. We are selling illusion. We need to become conjurers.
Edward Gübelin, one of the fathers of modern gemology, was recently asked by Professional Jeweler magazine about what could be done to sell more colored stones.

His answer? It wasn’t a call for more analysis. Instead, he said, “We have to emphasize the importance of gemstones as true gifts of nature and essential parts of our culture.”

Gifts of nature. I like that. When was the last time you looked at a stone and thought of it in anything approaching those terms? Maybe it’s time we started. Maybe it’s time we stopped being blinded by the science, but instead let it open our eyes to the wonder of it all. “Wow, isn’t that incredible?” Yes it is, yes it is…

In the end, educated analysis (of a gemstone) requires more than just a formula, just as fine cooking involves not simply ingredients and a recipe. It is about reaching for factors beyond the immediate senses, and in that respect is akin to the enjoyment of fine art, food or music… without the passion that only the viewer can bring, both these precious stones and our time on this precious planet are a waste.

Noyes’ reference to a shattered world is profound. Ever since the Cartesian Division of the renaissance, the world has been viewed as a huge machine whose parts need to be analyzed and scrutinized. After seeing where this has led us today (depressing news, delivered daily), it is felt that poets need to be invited along more often. Visionaries are needed to bring wholeness to science and education. Perhaps gemology will be the science to show the way.

 

Back>>