Isaas of Stella on Intellectus and Intelligentia: Two Levels of the Higher Soul

Robert Fludd, Jacob’s Ladder

AUGUSTINE famously distinguished between two powers or levels of human reason, which he called lower reason (ratio inferior) and higher reason (ratio superior).  These refer, respectively, to discursive reasoning (ratiocination) and intellection (immediate grasp), and correspond to what in the Platonic/Neoplatonic tradition are called dianoia and nous.

Augustine’s views, of course, were very influential in the Middle Ages.  In the 12th century, however, the  Cistercian monk, Isaac of Stella (1100−1178) proposed three ascending levels of rational power: ratio, intellectus, and intelligentia.  That is, basically Augustine’s ratio superior is subdivided into intellectus and intelligentia.  How intellectus and intelligentia differ and is a fascinating question, because it suggest that we have two distinct levels of higher intelligence.

Isaac’s descriptions — given in his Epistle on the Soul (De anima) and Sermon 4 — are frustratingly short and obscure.  In the former he writes:

By reason [ratione] it perceives the dimensions of bodies and the like. This is the first incorporeal object which nevertheless needs a body to subsist and through it is in place and time. By [intellectu] the soul goes beyond everything that is a body or of a body or is in any way corporeal to perceive the created spirit, which has no location but cannot possibly exist without duration since it has a changeable nature. Finally the [intelligentia], in one way or another, and insofar as it is permitted a created nature above whom is the Creator alone, immediately beholds him or who alone is the highest and purely incorporeal being — he who needs neither a body to exist, nor location to be somewhere, nor duration to be at some time or other. (tr. McGinn)

In Sermon 4 he writes:

7. … By [intellectu] the soul perceives that which is above the corporeal or above created spirit united to a body. It does not need a body to subsist and is therefore independent of space, but it cannot exist outside of time because it is by nature mutable.

8. [Intelligentia], in so far as is permitted to a created nature which has nothing above it but the Creator, has immediate sight of the Being who is supremely and purely incorporeal, the One who has no need of a body in which to exist, nor of a place in which to be present, nor of time in which to continue existence. (tr. McCaffrey)

It should be noted that in both places Isaac discusses these in the context of a five-level ascent from the lowest level of cognition (sensu; physical sensation), to imagination (imaginatio), ratio, intellectus and intellegentia).  Behind this scheme is a definite anagogic purpose, i.e., a raising of the soul to union with God.

Note here both intellectus and intelligentia are described as more specific than Platonic intellection or nous, which is the power by which we grasp Forms and relations, including, for example, those of mathematics, geometry, logic and morals (Uebersax, 2013).

What Isaac’s sources were is unclear.  Some suggest Proclus, others Pseudo-Dionysius and John Scotus Eriugena, and still others (perhaps most convincingly), Boethius.  Regardless, he influenced such later writers as Alan of Lille, John of La Rochelle, Alexander of Hales, Thomas Gallus and St. Bonaventure.  How they used the two terms is by no means consistent. However many evidently found it helpful — whether for theoretical reasons or to describe and schematize their own contemplative experiences — to make a division between two levels of higher intelligence.

In one place, for example, Alan of Lille describes intellectus as the mind’s “gaze is turned toward the pure forms,” and intelligentia as the highest power of the soul “which contemplates only divine things.” (Sermo in Die Epiphaniae; d’Alverny, pp. 242−243)

McGinn (1977) supplies many details concerning Isaac’s sources for this distinction and its history.  Isaac’s De anima was included of the composite anonymous work (falsely attributed to St. Augustine) called De spiritu et anima, widely read in the 13th century.

Ultimately, the practical question seems the most important one.  Do we indeed have two, ascending powers of intelligence above discursive reason?  That is, are there two levels of immediate intellection — the higher, perhaps, more specifically spiritual?

❧

Bibliography

d’Alverny, Marie-Thérése. Alain de Lille: Textes inédits. Études de Philosophie Médiévale LII. Paris, 1965.

Deme, Daniel  (ed.). Selected Works of Isaac of Stella. Ashgate, 2007.

Isaac of Stella. Epistle de anima. J. P. Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 194 1875B−1890A. Paris, 1855.

Isaac of Stella. Sermones. J. P. Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 194 1689A−1876A. Paris, 1855.

McCaffrey, Hugh (tr.). Isaac of Stella: Sermons for the Christian Year. Cistercian Publications, 1979.

McGinn, Bernard. The Golden Chain: A Study in the Theological Anthropology of Isaac of Stella. Cistercian Publications, 1972. Chapter IV. The Higher Dimension of the Soul in Isaac of Stella; pp. 197−227.

McGinn, Bernard. Three Treatises on Man. A Cistercian Anthropology. Cistercian Publications, 1977. Includes English translations of Epistola de anima and De spiritu et anima.

Uebersax, John.  Higher Reason.  2013.

❧ ❧

On the Six Levels of Contemplation – Richard of Saint-Victor

Seraphim, Petites Heures de Jean de Berry (14th century)

CHRISTIAN mystics have an elaborate system for classifying contemplative experience. In fact, possibly it’s too systematized; at least I personally have never been able to fully understand it. Accordingly, I’d like to de-mystify (no pun inteded) things by going back early in the tradition, to when this effort to classify and arrange experiences was getting started: systematized, but perhaps not overly so.

To begin then, in the 12th century, Richard of St. Victor proposed a classification of contemplative experience into six ascending grades. The six forms of contemplation are associated with the six winged seraphim in Isaiah’s famous vision (Isaiah 6:1–3). His system strongly influenced St. Bonaventure, who, a century later proposed his own six-fold classification of contemplative experiences.

Richard’s classification is not simply derived from experience (i.e., phenomenological observation), but also relies on a theoretical premise. Specifically, he sees the human mind as having three divisions: (1) sense perception and sensory imagination; (2) discursive reasoning or ratiocination (Latin: ratio; Greek: dianoia); and (3) pure intellection (i.e., immediate intuitive grasp; Greek: noesis). From this three-fold division he derives his six ascending grades of contemplation, as follows:

1. Sense experience alone. Example: contemplating natural beauty for its own sake; a purely aesthetic experience.)
2. Sense experience combined with reasoning. Example: contemplating natural beauty, and then thinking about what it implies (e.g., a providential and wise Creator).
3. Reasoning guided by imagination. Example: admiring a flower and considering how its unfolding petals correspond to human mental development.
4. Reasoning alone. Example: noticing some process within ones own mind, and that leading to some further self-insight.
5. Insight above, but not contrary to ratiocination. Example: an insight into some aspect of God’s nature or being that conforms to logic.
6. Insight above and contrary to or completely uninterpretable by ratiocination. Example: an insight into some aspect of God’s nature or being that is beyond or contradicts logic.

This discussion appears in Benjamin Major (The Mystical Ark) 1.6.

The arrangement is systematic, but not overwhelmingly so. He emphasizes that contemplation is something fluid and dynamic. That is, during contemplation the mind moves freely among these levels. He likens things to a hawk or kestrel that flies higher or lower, sometimes hovering, sometimes diving, sometimes returning for a second look, and so on. This is an intriguing analogy not only because of its aptness, but also because it’s likely an insight derived from his own contemplative practice (level 3 contemplation).

In Book 5 he supplies another classification concerning contemplation at the highest levels, noting that one may experience (1) mental expansion (dilatatio mentis), (2) mental elevation (sublevatio mentis), and finally (3) ecstatic loss (alienatio) of consciousness.

Benjamin, youngest of Jacob’s 12 sons, is, for Richard, is a symbol of contemplation. He basis this on the Vulgate version of Psalm lxvii.: Ibi Benjamin adolescentulus in mentis excessu: “There is Benjamin, a youth, in ecstasy of mind.” (whereas the modern English Bible reads: “Little Benjamin their ruler.”)

His two works, Benjamin Minor (The Twelve Patriarchs) and Benjamin Major (The Mystical Ark) consider the ascetical/moral preparation for contemplation, and contemplation itself, respectively.

At the birth of Benjamin, his mother Rachel dies, and Richard writes: “For, when the mind of man is rapt above itself, it surpasseth all the limits of human reasoning. Elevated above itself and rapt in ecstasy, it beholdeth things in the divine light at which all human reason succumbs. What, then, is the death of Rachel, save the failing of reason?” (Benjamin Minor 73).

So in sum, we can see that Richard’s ‘system’ (if that’s a fair term to apply) is a felicitious combination of knowledge derived from experience and dialectic. As such it represents, arguably, a remarkably high level of synthesis between experience, creative imagination, insight and rational analysis.

A century later Scholasticism would be in full swing, the balance leaning progressively more and more (up to this day!) towards intellectual analysis (or perhaps we should say, towards a dissociation of rationalism and mysticism).

References

Aris, Marc-Aeilko (ed.). Contemplatio: Philosophische Studien zum Traktat Benjamin Maior des Richard von St. Victor. Improved edition of text. Frankfurt am Main, 1996.

Palmén, Ritva. Richard of St. Victor’s Theory of Imagination. Brill, 2014. Dissertation, University of Helsinki, 2013.

Richard of Saint-Victor. Omnia opera. Patrologia Latina, ed. J. P. MIGNE (Paris 1878–90) 196.

Zinn, Grover A. (tr.). Richard of St. Victor: The Twelve Patriarchs, The Mystical Ark and Book Three of The Trinity. Paulist Press, 1979.