Dante's The Divine Comedy: The Inferno

Dante The Divine Comedy Volume 1: Inferno Transl. Mark Musa.  Penguin Classics 1971



We've jumped 12 centuries to the 1300s this week.  Dante Alighieri was a Florentine (b. 1265, died in exile in Ravenna in 1321).  We are only reading the 1st volume of his Divine Comedy.  I'll have to put Volume 2 (Purgatory) and Volume 3 (Paradise) on to my ever-expanding reading list for when the course year is over.  After reading the Inferno, I feel as if I really need to know who makes it to the next levels!

This was an interesting book for me.  We went to church when I was growing up but the imagery and the elaborate structure of Hell described in this book is not anything I was ever exposed to before.  It was intriguing to think that Dante based much of his structure on Virgil's Aeneid.  As the Inferno shows, Virgil was not a Christian and so he is relegated to Hell and not able to aspire to Purgatory or Paradise.

I found the imagery in this poem to be stunning.  Much of it was horrifying and I can't imagine what it would have been like to live believing that these torments are actually what you would be suffering after death.  I was hooked right from the beginning of this book, with the opening line (Canto I, 1-3):

Midway along the journey of our life
I woke to find myself in a dark wood,
for I had wandered off from the straight path.

Even his description of Virgil has so much packed into 3 lines (Canto I, 60-63):

While I was rushing down to that low place,
my eyes made out a figure coming towards me
of one grown faint, perhaps from too much silence.

Some of the content was familiar to me, such as the famous (though I didn't realize or remember that it came from Dante) warning (Canto II, 9):

ABANDON EVERY HOPE, ALL YOU WHO ENTER

But much of the imagery was new to me: rivers of boiling blood, the geryon, the various torments.



The intricate structure of the Inferno was amazing and confusing.  Now I'll have to read Virgil and Aristotle to see where some or much of this may have come from.  The 9 circles of Hell (+ the outer vestibule for worthy un-baptised and non-Christians) and all of the fine gradations within: the three rings in the 7th circle, the 10 malabolgias (bad ditches) in the 8th circle, the Upper and Lower parts of Hell, the City of Dis, the various rivers and marshes, the physical structures (bridges, towers, castles, abysses, burning sands, gates and barriers), and the various monsters (Minos, Cerburus, Plutus, Furies, Erinyes, harpies, Gorgons, Minotaur, Centaurs, black devils, black cherubim, giants and then the giant Lucifer stuck upside down at the very bottom of Hell.



It was also quite interesting to see how Dante ordered the various types of sinners.  He makes a difference between the sins of the intellect and sins of action.  The Inferno was divided into Upper and Lower Hell with Upper Hell being for sins of Incontinence (essentially lack of control), which he calls the Sins of the Wolf; and Lower Hell being for sins that are deliberately done - the Sins of the Lion.  The division is at the City of Dis.  Heretics are separate, being based on intellectual pride.  The Heretics are within the Gates of Dis, and so placed between the sins of Incontinence and those of Malice.  In Outer Hell are the Lustful and the Gluttonous outermost, the hoarders and the spendthrifts, then the wrathful, the Heretics, the Violent (least sinful were those violent against their neighbours, then those against themselves - the Suicides - then most sinful were those violent against God and nature.  He includes Fraud as being very sinful, putting it lower (more serious) than Violence, down the abyss to the 10 stone ravines in the 8th circle of Hell containing the Sins of the Leopard (from least sinful to most sinful):

• panderers and seducers
• simonists (churchmen who took money for religious acts)
• sorcerers
• barrators (secular simonists, grafters, sellers of public office)
• hypocrites
• thieves
• deceivers
• sowers of discord
• falsifiers



Then the giants.



It was strange to have those who committed violence considered less sinful than the hypocrites and thieves or deceivers; those committing suicide more sinful than those who killed their neighbours.  He also puts the Profligates in with the Suicides in the Wood of the Suicides, because they violently waste what they have.

There was certainly much passion in the Inferno, with many of the sinners those who had let themselves be governed by passion.  Some obvious cases like Francesca da Rimini and Paolo (Canto V) in the 2nd circle of hell who gave in to their love for one another and betrayed family (her husband who was his brother).  Dante writes about "those who make reason slave to appetite" (V.39), probably as neat a summary of the usual conflict between reason and passion as anyone could write.

It also contains a line I've heard before that contains so much in what it doesn't say.  Francesca is speaking to Dante about how she and Paolo came to give in to their lust while reading about Lancelot (from a french text Lancelot du Lac),
"That day we read no further."  (V.138)

Regarding passion again, Dante writes, as the Pilgrim visits the 3rd circle of hell (Gluttony), in canto VI, "...for pride, envy, avarice are the three sparks
that kindle men's hearts and set them burning."

Virgil tells Dante (The Pilgrim):
"...Remember your philosophy:
the closer a thing comes to its perfection,
more keen will be its pleasure or its pain."  (VI, 106-108)

In the 6th circle (Heretics), in canto XI, Virgil instructs the Pilgrim on philosophy:
Philosophy...points out to one who reads with understanding
how Nature takes her course form the Divine.
[...]
From Art and Nature man was meant to take
his daily bread to live - if you recall
the book of Genesis near the beginning;
(XI, 97-108)

At the edge of the Wood of the Suicides they come to the Burning Sands and a river of boiling blood (the Phlegethon) and Virgil tells the Pilgrim about the Old Man of Crete whose tears are the source of all the rivers in Hell (Acheron, Styx, Phlegethon  which all eventually collect to form the pool Cocytus at the bottom of the Inferno.)

Several Cantos deal with their travels in the 8th circle of Hell, over the 10 malabolgias (bad ditches, a series of stone ravines traversed by stone bridges).  In the 5th bolgia (for Barrators) Dante writes (XXI.42) "You can change a 'no' to 'yes' for cash in Lucca".  Again such a succinct way to say so much - though when we were in Italy in 2007 Lucca was a favourite city to visit and I had no idea of its medieval reputation for barratry.  Dante considered barratry as secular simonry.  It later acquired other meanings including the vexatious stirring up of quarrels or bringing of lawsuits; or the offense of persistently instigating lawsuits, typically groundless ones.



In the 7th bolgia ((Thieves, whose torment is applied by serpents) Dante talks about fame, something we've discussed in class with other texts.  When you start to consider the meaning of life, what a good life is, what is the purpose of it all, there have been many discussions about how whatever one does in one's live it is unlikely to last for very long.  Any descendants you have won't remember much about you after a couple of generations.  If you leave a work of art (painting, writing, pottery etc) it may or may not last very long, if it does last for centuries or millenia, those coming after may not know much about you (such as Sappho or even Lucretius) so what does it mean.  Virgil tells Dante :

Come on, shake off the covers of this sloth,
the master said, for sitting softly cushioned,
or tucked into bed is no way to win fame;

and without it man must waste his life away,
leaving such traces of what he was on earth
as smoke in wind and foam upon the water.
(XXIV, 46-50)

In canto XXIV Dante enumerates many exotic reptiles from the sands of Libya (which interestingly in some background reading for my essay I read was considered by some to be the location of the Elysian Fields or the Isles of the Blest): chelydri (which leave smoking paths), jaculi (which dart in the air and pierce), phareans (which makes paths with their tails), cenchres (which leave a wavering course in the sands) and head-tailed amphisbenes (2 heads, one at each end).


Again it's always nice to see a reference to something we've read this term and have more understanding of the reference now.
In Canto X (X.14-15), Dante writes:
...Epicurus and his followers
who make the soul die when the body dies.


The sheer number of references to legendary and historical figures and events, to places, to myths was staggering and again, I want to read so much more about them.
All the mythological figures (too many to list), Dolcino and Margaret of Trent, Caesar hesitating to cross the Rubicon (which I always thought was a Napoleonic reference and probably was used for him referring back to Caesar), Bertran de Born a Provencal troubadour in the 1100s who caused the rebellion of Prince Henry against his father Henry II of England, Nimrod building the Tower of Babel, Mordred (wicked nephew of King Arthur), Ganelon who betrayed Roland to the Saracens (making me remember Arezzo and their annual jousts which we saw in June where men on horseback from various factions in the city tilt against the wooden figure of a Saracen holding a shield and 3 wooden balls), Tolomen (Ptolemy), Caiaphas who advised Pontius Pilate, Michael Scot (a scottish soothsayer at Frederick II's court at Palermo), the Donation of Constantine, Cato and Pompey and the Caesars, Camilla, Penthesilea (Queen of Amazons), Semiramis (Queen of Assyria), Dido (Queen of Carthage), Tristan (sent by his uncle King Mark of Cornwall, to obtain Isolt).

So many stories and historical events that I'm dying to read more about.  This book was so rich.  It makes a strong case for not letting your passions overthrow your reason.  Our other text this week is Rumi's poetry - incredibly different.  Lots of passion but in a more transcendent way.

Discussion of the Bhagavad Gita and of Genesis

One of the interesting facets of this course already is how each text builds on the other texts we have read or are reading.  This of course is one of the main reasons this master's program interested me but it’s also making me want to read so much more: either by the same authors or their contemporaries, or to read about what was going on in the world at the time – and I don’t have time to do this!

Today we spoke about Genesis (the 1^st book of the Old Testament) and about the Bhagavad Gita, an ancient Sanskrit text that was part of the Upanishads (records of conversations between teachers and students about the nature of reality).

We were told that there are some themes that will recur through many of the texts we’ll be reading.

• Dualism – (male/female, black/white) - is this limiting or simplifying?
• Anthropocentrism – humans and the natural world
•  Mutuality – opposite of dualism

There were some similarities in both texts.  Both evolved over many many years as oral texts before being written down (in about 1250 BCE for Genesis and in about 150 BCE for the Gita).  There was some discussion about how these texts would have changed many times during the oral period but then would have become fixed once they were written down.  During our discussion of Plato's Phaedrus, we had learned how Socrates did not want to write any of his ideas down because then they would become fixed, and for him the value was in discussing ideas and then rethinking them, having them continually evolve.

Both texts are smaller parts of larger works: Genesis is the 1^st book of the Old Testament which in turn is part of the Bible; the Gita is part of the Mahabharata epic which in turn was part of the Upanishads.  Both texts try to explain man’s role in the natural world and to provide some hope of a better world, achievable if certain rules or paths are followed, though the Gita seems to be a more coherent work than Genesis.

In discussing both texts, the class spoke about how the Gita came out of a pantheistic viewpoint whereas in Genesis there was only one God, something very unusual in religions at the time.  The Gita conceived of the divine being the universe.  The Gita was very repetitive, with much of the same information or teachings being mentioned over and over again.  Part of this may be because it was originally an oral text and a teaching tool, and the repetition would help with learning and memorization.  Some of it may also be connected to the fact, as Surinder mentioned, that Eastern thought is not linear but is more circular.  Things are repeated but each time you should develop a deeper understanding – like peeling away the outer layers to get to the deeper core.

In contrast Genesis doesn’t really seem to have a master structure or plan.  It seems to be a recounting of some historical events, and occasionally events are used to provide guidance on how to act (or how not to act) but it is not very cohesive and does not seem to be formally organized the way the Gita is.

In the Gita, there is no mention of society, it’s all about the individual whereas Genesis is about lineage, and the cities and tribes founded by various descendants of Adam.  There is less focus on the individual and more focus on the family unit and by extension, eventually, society.  The main message in Genesis is to worship the one God, be loyal to the one God - as well as a message of healthy respect and fear of God.

We had a brief discussion about the theory of the bicameral mind: that the mind in ancient peoples (over 3000 years ago) was divided between the “speaking” mind and the “listening and obeying” mind.  Some propose that this would explain the importance and the quotidian nature of communications between mankind and gods – and the vividness of the accounts of these interactions.

We discussed whether Genesis is an historical account, a sacred text or a fable.  My perception is that it is an attempt at a historical text (though much altered by the centuries of oral transmission) as well as a text to explain the world and guide readers.  The book begins with much anger and punishment as mankind is banished from paradise, destroyed in a great flood, condemned to a life of hard labour and pain, and condemned to confusion and misunderstanding between various peoples.  I hadn’t picked up on the change from this to a religion more about love and forgiveness which occurs by the end of Genesis, being so distracted by the sacrifices, slaughter, famines & plagues, incest, rape, betrayal etc.  But in fact, this 1^st book ends with Joseph forgiving his brothers and alleviating their suffering during the famine.  Genesis suggests that suffering is mankind’s lot in life but if we worship God and follow his rules, he will take care of us.  

There was much passion in Genesis, mostly negative passions: anger, jealousy, fear.  The Gita was more about ridding oneself of passion.  It was more difficult to find examples of reason in Genesis.  It seemed to be more a case of cause and effect: God dictating and mankind either obeying and surviving, or disobeying and being punished.  Towards the end of the book though, reason does seem to emerge. God seems to take a step backwards from direct involvement in mankind’s decisions and actions and we see Joseph interpreting the Pharoah’s dream and then acting in a thoughtful and reasonable manner, a compassionate and forgiving manner, and explaining his actions and the reasons for them.

The Gita contained much ‘reason’ with the entire text revolving on questions about how to live life and how to act, and then a well-reasoned, structured answer about the various ways one can live one’s life with the ultimate purpose being to rid oneself of desire, of clinging to the consequences of actions, and thus eventually achieving Nirvana.  

In both texts there is emphasis on following a circumscribed path to a better existence, with no support being given to straying from the common path or for aspiring anything different.

Imagination è Desire è Suffering

I found both texts very interesting and will continue to think about what they had to impart but I'm still looking for different answers, as a life without imagination is not one I wish to contemplate.

THE BHAGAVAD GITA
(Transl. Laurie L. Patton, Penguin Classics, 2008)

Plato's Phaedrus (which we read and discussed in July) proposed that wisdom was gained through discussion with others, not in isolation in nature nor via meditation.  Socrates felt that ideas and theories were honed through discussion, by being challenged.  He argues that the quest for Beauty is the quest for the perfect form, for wisdom.  The Bhagavad Gita sets out a different slightly quest.  Wisdom is still honoured but the goal in the Gita is enlightenment.

The Gita describes 3 gitas, or paths towards enlightenment:

Karmamarga - the path of action
Jnanamarga - the path of knowledge
Bhaktimarga - the path of devotion

Jnanamarga would be the path that Plato/Socrates would have followed, trying to understand all the categories of the ancient world, and enumerating everything, in order to then understand the universe (samkhya - the yoga of knowledge).

In the Gita's philosophy, the self (atman) moves from life to life in a cycle of birth and death but ideally always progressing upwards, closer and closer to the Divine.

Krishna (Vishnu), one of 2 main characters in the Gita, does not recommend one particular path over another but stresses that above all one must act without clinging to the consequences (the 'fruits') of the action.

I found much of what was discussed in the Gita to be of current interest, in its discussions of living a thoughtful life, knowing oneself and being true to oneself.

3.35  
Better one's own dharma, 
even if ineffective, 
than the dharma 
of another, practised well!
Better death
in one's own dharma!



Like Plato, Krishna values wisdom

4.38
In this world,
there is no purifier
like wisdom;
in time, one who is oneself perfected
by yoga
finds that wisdom
in the self.

This focus on looking within, of not clinging to 'wordly' things, is repeated over and over in the Gita.  Krishna discusses the 3-fold gates of hell which destroys the self: 
greed, anger and desire.  Whereas

5.24
The one who practises yoga,
who has joy within,
delight within,
and then radiance within,
thus reaches cessation 
in Brahman,
of one being 
with Brahman.

The Gita talks about giving up anger and desire, of giving up purposeful intent.
This is at odds with western civilization and especially North American culture.  Would insulin have been discovered, the automobile invented, would Neil Armstrong (who died this week) have been the 1st man to walk on the moon?  Krishna would argue that all of these are worthless, that a person's life (though he would have said a 'man's life' as women didn't figure much in Krishna's directions about how to live one's life), that a man's life was all about living according to one's dharma, following one of the disciplines (gitas or paths) to eventually achieve release from the cycle of transmigration (moksha).  It wasn't about achieving anything, about improving "man's" life on earth, about searching for happiness.  It was about freeing oneself from the earthly trappings that prevent transcendence into the divine.

We are at an interesting time in the history of mankind where we have knowledge that gives us the power to catastrophically affect the world we live in, yet as a species we have not achieved a broad enough communal wisdom to be able to wield this power (or NOT wield it) for the greater good of the species much less for the environment (meaning the other forms of life on earth but also the universe around us).  I don't know that I can fully subscribe to an ideology that not only does not value expanding our knowledge in order to improve our lot, but one which only values life on earth as something to be shed in such a way as to end up somewhere else.

I do find value in the ideal of not clinging to things, of not giving in to anger, desire, jealousy and all the other base emotions but I also value intelligence, compassion, altruism, honesty, creativity and imagination, I value human energy, and I value those people who don't feel bound by the norms (Plato's 4th kind of madness).  I think the discovery of insulin and penicillin, of robotics, of the magnifying properties of glass, of so many of mankind's achievements are worthy and good.  If these discoveries and the world they have brought us to (2012) had been tempered by some of the values promulgated in the Gita, we might not have the wars, the pollution and destruction, the loss of species, some of the disease, that we have today.
All pieces of the puzzle.