MIDTERM QUESTION C
Comment on Peter Brown`s statement that the holy man was "the self-made man."
(78) If he was such a man, how did he differ from the Greek ascetics? Compare
and contrast these two cultural and spiritual traditions.
#1
Holy man was a self-made man in the sense that he was a strong person who built him/herself up into virtue (and often also prominence) without the help of any formal institutions, established procedures or schooling. In order to execute the functions that Peter Brown ascribes to the holy men (mediator, exorcist, healer etc.), the person had to build his or her reputation from scratch, first severing all attachments to the society and later building a completely new ones with totally different significance and responsibilities. There are some important similarities between the holy man and the Greek ascetic. They both disconnected themselves from the every day desires and pleasures of the society, cut their social and emotional ties and through training attained new quality of life. They have both done this through mostly unofficial means. In fact, they often attacked and threatened official structures - in case of Greek ascetics, the social and political structure (e.g. Diogenes` relationship to Alexander the Great), in case of the Christian holy men the spiritual hypocrisy and official church structure (e.g. Isidora`s "proof" that even in monasteries people can be merciless and violent). However, while the Greek ascetics put stress on cultivation of mind, holy men concentrated on prayer and spirituality. The Greeks stressed knowledge and education and mental training, while the holy men strove for enlightenment and discarded conventional knowledge. A cornerstone of this approach is Paul`s assertion in 1Cor. that "God`s foolishness is wiser than human wisdom" (1Cor.1:25). Both the Greek ascetics and holy men tried to show a better way to the people, but while the Greeks concentrated on reaching improvement for this life, the ascetics had an eternal and transcendent goal in mind. Sometimes the Greek ascetics and Christian holy men reached similar results with almost directly opposite rationale. While the holy man was a "stranger" to all, Diogenes claimed to be "citizen of the world." Both of these approaches, whether isolating or uniting the person and the society, resulted in general attitude towards these men and women as not belonging to any particular group but being accessible to any one - "separated from all and united with all."
#2
C. The holy man of Late Roman society and the Greek ascetic were two key models in the development of spiritual and cultural traditions. Although it could be argued that these traditions cultivated anti-social and physically harming behaviours, what is more important is that they attempted to create better ways of life for themselves and their communities.
The Greek ascetics came from various schools of thought. The followers of Epicurus, known as Epicureans, are not usually included in the consideration of ascetics, for their philosophy was centered on materialism. However, it might be helpful to add that even this group could be seen as ascetic in the way that their goal was to attain pleasure, which was defined in terms of tranquility, and that this could be done by minimizing one?s desires and liberating oneself from fear of the gods and death. Minimization of desire was important also for the Stoics and the Cynics, the two major groups in Greek asceticism. The Stoics believed in simplification, and that human suffering comes from our uncontrolled minds. Epictetus, one of the main proponents of this school, taught that unfortunate events inevitably occur; all that we can do is prepare for these things and not let them affect us. Through Stoicism, we are to develop peace of mind. The Cynics also had happiness as the end of their thought. Cynics rejected the values of society (power, money, etc.) in order to live a life of cultivating virtue. Diogenes, one of the most active and famous of the Cynics, made his life into his work. He argued that even when he was considered a slave by society, he could be the intellectual master of any man, as he proved on several occasions with Alexander the Great. In this way, the Greek ascetics set the stage for the holy man of Syria and Asia Minor.
The holy man is a unique phenomenon that is often passed over in consideration of post-Greek philosophy. This is probably due to its association with the larger tradition of Christianity, and the fact that many holy men would not be considered such by modern definitions of the Christian faith. Regardless, the holy man was an instrumental part of Late Roman society. He was, much like the Cynics tried to be, seen as a"?`blessed object` in the midst of his fellows" (Course Packet [CP] 81). The holy man was a source of spiritual power. What is notable about this power is how it was created by his own merit, much like the fame of the Greek philosophers. Thus, the holy man may be described as "the self-made man," to use Peter Brown`s terms (CP 94). In his 1971 article from The Journal of Roman Studies, Brown states, "It was through the hard business of living his life for twenty-four hours in the day . . . that the holy man gained power in society? (CP 65). Like the Greek ascetics, the holy man rejected society`s values in order to gain prominence through a different set of values. The holy man`s work, however, was far less separated from the community than the Greek ascetics; in fact, it could be said that the holy man was the caretaker of the community. He distributed water, arranged the counselling of debts, and settled disputes among the villagers. (CP 69) The holy man was able to be the unbiased mediator they needed because "he was thought of as a man who owed nothing to society," had nothing invested in society (CP 76). Finally, the main point is that "the holy man drew his powers from outside the human race" (CP 76). This self-created power was what connected him to the ascetic tradition cultivated in Greece and allowed him to be the revered figure that he was.
