← Home
Plato: Symposium · 7 of 36 · tr. Benjamin Jowett

Section 1g

I will amend this defect; and first of all I would tell you which Love is deserving of praise, and then try to hymn the praiseworthy one in a manner worthy of him. For we all know that Love is inseparable from Aphrodite, and if there were only one Aphrodite there would be only one Love; but as there are two goddesses there must be two Loves. And am I not right in asserting that there are two goddesses? The elder one, having no mother, who is called the heavenly Aphrodite-she is the daughter of Uranus; the younger, who is the daughter of Zeus and Dione-her we call common; and the Love who is her fellow-worker is rightly named common, as the other love is called heavenly. All the gods ought to have praise given to them, but not without distinction of their natures; and therefore I must try to distinguish the characters of the two Loves. Now actions vary according to the manner of their performance. Take, for example, that which we are now doing, drinking, singing and talking these actions are not in themselves either good or evil, but they turn out in this or that way according to the mode of performing them; and when well done they are good, and when wrongly done they are evil; and in like manner not every love, but only that which has a noble purpose, is noble and worthy of praise. The Love who is the offspring of the common Aphrodite is essentially common, and has no discrimination, being such as the meaner sort of men feel, and is apt to be of women as well as of youths, and is of the body rather than of the soul-the most foolish beings are the objects of this love which desires only to gain an end, but never thinks of accomplishing the end nobly, and therefore does good and evil quite indiscriminately. The goddess who is his mother is far younger than the other, and she was born of the union of the male and female, and partakes of both. But the offspring of the heavenly Aphrodite is derived from a mother in whose birth the female has no part,-she is from the male only; this is that love which is of youths, and the goddess being older, there is nothing of wantonness in her. Those who are inspired by this love turn to the male, and delight in him who is the more valiant and intelligent nature; any one may recognise the pure enthusiasts in the very character of their attachments. For they love not boys, but intelligent, beings whose reason is beginning to be developed, much about the time at which their beards begin to grow. And in choosing young men to be their companions, they mean to be faithful to them, and pass their whole life in company with them, not to take them in their inexperience, and deceive them, and play the fool with them, or run away from one to another of them. But the love of young boys should be forbidden by law, because their future is uncertain; they may turn out good or bad, either in body or soul, and much noble enthusiasm may be thrown away upon them; in this matter the good are a law to themselves, and the coarser sort of lovers ought to be restrained by force; as we restrain or attempt to restrain them from fixing their affections on women of free birth. These are the persons who bring a reproach on love; and some have been led to deny the lawfulness of such attachments because they see the impropriety and evil of them; for surely nothing that is decorously and lawfully done can justly be censured.
Themes
Divine Madnesssoteriology

Ecstatic irrational rapture — Plato's mania, Bruno's furore — by which the soul transcends ordinary reason and attains direct contact with divine reality; madness reframed as higher knowledge.

The text refers to those inspired by heavenly love as 'pure enthusiasts,' aligning with the Platonic concept of divine possession or mania.

All passages →
Related passages · 3 parallels
christian_mysticism|Pseudo-Dionysius: The Divine Names|Chapter 11, Section 1e
Hence the Good God is called the Fount, first, of the Very Primaries: then, of those creatures which share completely therein; then, of those which share partially therein. 484 484 Migne’s text here is corrupt, I have emended it. (1) The…”
Both passages discuss the nature of divine love and its manifestations. Plato's Symposium distinguishes between heavenly and common love, while the second passage from Dionysius the Areopagite discusses the outpouring of divine goodness and beauty. Both explore the hierarchical and differentiated nature of divine attributes and their effects on creation.
renaissance_hermeticism|The Heroic Enthusiasts, Part I (Gli Eroici Furori)|Third Dialoguea
. Tansillo . There are several varieties of enthusiasts, which may all be reduced to two kinds. While some only display blindness, stupidity, and irrational impetuosity, which tend towards savage madness, others by divine abstraction bec…”
Both passages discuss different types of love and enthusiasm, distinguishing between higher, divine forms and lower, base forms. They both emphasize the noble and praiseworthy aspects of love and enthusiasm, which elevate the soul and lead to a higher understanding.
renaissance_hermeticism|The Heroic Enthusiasts, Part I (Gli Eroici Furori)|Fifth Dialoguem
In conclusion, whatever love it may be, it is ever afflicted and tormented in such a way that it cannot fail to supply material for the forge of Vulcan; because the soul, being a divine thing, and by nature, not a servant but the mistress o…”
Both passages discuss the nature of love and its different manifestations, exploring the idea of divine and earthly love, and the qualities associated with each. They both use mythological references to illustrate their points, though from different traditions.