Skip to main content

Skendes and recursive ontology (partly by Imogen Reed)

Imogen Reed wrote to me kindly offering a piece of writing to this blog. I suggested him to write something on Skendes, the Ethiopian philosopher, which he promptly did. Skendes´life and his decision for silence as a punishment self-inflicted for having fooled his mother and cause her to suicide through his speech calls my attention. It could also be seen as yet another slant on the Oedipus narrative. Plus, his silence - his oral quietism - probably influenced the image of a philosopher - or of a wise person - in some parts of the world.

I was reading some of the questions and answers of Skendes book. Question 18 is about the ocean and he connects it with a womb. Not a surprising connection (with even an evolutionary ring to it). It made me think of the recursive element here: the womb is a generator of all that exist - "the whole world is in its womb" - and yet it is exists. The womb is not outside the world as the monads are not outside matter. Ontogenesis is part of ontology. It is not outside it like we think of abstraction. It can even be thought as an object amidst others, but it can also be a repository of matter ("it has no boundaries", writes Skendes) that germinates future bodies as it acts as unemployed matter. Unemployment is what points at what is yet to be a job - unregistered production. The ocean - or the womb - is made of what is going to exist or, rather, is going to be made of what exists.

I include below part of the text on Skendes sent by Imogen:

The much celebrated story of Skendes an ancient philosopher has occupied the storytelling generations of Greek, Syrian, Arabic and Ethiopian scholars over centuries. It has been argued between Arabic, Greek and Ethiopian who the text is based on – with the Ethiopian text based on Arabic and yet some scholars state it is stylized on the Greek people. The story itself as the Ethiopian version goes tells of Skendes, son of shrewd parents, wanting the best education for their son, that decided to send him for a classical education to Berytus (Beirut) and Athens. At the time Skendes left for this scholarly mission he was just thirteen years old.

Whilst abroad Skendes was exposed to the thoughts of so called wise philosophers who told him “All women are prostitutes”. Determined to test this theory after staying away for twenty four years he returned to his former home country and decided to test his own mother. By tricking a maid into letting him into his mother's house he ended up spending the night with his own mother. Upon revealing himself as her son she was so appalled by the discovery that she hung herself.

As a punishment for allowing his tongue to ultimately cause his own mother's death via his deceitful means Skendes made a vow never to speak again. From that moment on he remained mute as a penance for speaking at all.

At the time the emperor was Andryanos – upon hearing of Skendes' unusual story he invited him to his court. Instead of speaking his thoughts when ordered to he wrote them down. As a result Emperor Andryanos communicated back to him through writing with his responses being organised into two sections.

The first section contained fifty-five sections and the second, one hundred and eight questions. Skendes developed theories in answer to these questions, all about the essence of God, the angels, man, the world, the sun, moon, stars, sky, clouds and earth as well as the mind, the spirit, the winds, thunder, the air, the ocean, the soul, man and woman. After the emperor listened with great care to what Skendes was saying (writing) he was acutely impressed and did not again order the philosopher to speak. Instead he officially declared that Skendes by treated as a national treasure and be preserved in the priests' archives.


  1. hilan, esse post me incomodou.
    começando pelo "The ocean - or the womb - is made of what is going to exist or, rather, is going to be made of what exists." acho fera essa pegada de ser completo de potencialidades - que é o que entendo de 'ser feito do que existirá'- é marota, mesmo porque acho que todas as coisas são assim, feitas do que existirá. mas ao mesmo tempo pode ser que esvazie as coisas do que existe... mas não é isso que quero dizer, queria saber o que você entende pela segunda parte 'será feito do que existe'. fiquei querendo ler essa questão dezoito ai pra saber pra que lado vai...

    esse começo do texto me incomodou por causa dessa ligação mar-útero-feminino-aquilo-que-dá-existência-ao-mundo-mas-não-existe-propriamente. não sei se é a pegada que você quer mesmo porque diz que 'the womb is not outside the world as the monads are not outside matter'. mas mesmo assim, parece que a ênfase está no que existirá a partir do mar/útero/feminino. parece reducionista da complexidade do oceano/útero, visto apenas como produtor de mundo. a ontogênese de fato tem que ser parte da ontologia, mas o útero ou o mar não são o começo absoluto, estão no meio também. o mar não é de gelo, oras.

    óbvio que a narrativa da origem do skendes também me incomoda. tudo bem, concedo que boa parte do incomodo tem a ver com ser um édipo que agride mais nossas sensibilidades cristianizadas (não é um engano do édipo, mas um édipo enganando uma jocasta em nome de provar uma teoria um tanto misógina sobre 'a-natureza-das-mulheres') digo que agride sensibilidades cristianizadas, porque a coisa da escolha, da intenção tá ai em jogo. édipo não teve a intenção, mas skendes teve.
    mas agride também pelo desfecho: ele realmente provou a teoria grega da natureza das mulheres, e pra isso uma mulher teve que morrer. novamente, mulheres morrendo por causa de homens e suas teorias malucas sobre a natureza do mundo, da natureza, do amor, das próprias mulheres...
    e, poxa, esse é o útero que cria o skendes filósofo, sabe? com a virtude da quietude, um cara perturbado por seu passado, blá. www.quepreguiç

  2. Sim, a estoria do Skendes é patriarcado puro. Acho que forcei a barra pra usar o post que o cara me ofereceu (no qual. na verdade, ele queria que incluísse um link pra uma companhia de seguros...). A coisa do útero-oceano era pra tentar mostrar que ontogênese com ontologia, as coisas que existem produzindo outras, mas nem por isso existem menos. O mar não é gelo. O mar ta aí. "Is made of what is going to exist or, rather, is going to be made of what exists" pareceu interessante porque o oceano-útero é, mas é feito do que virá. Talvez melhor do que is going to be made of what exists, nesse caso, sua composição é que está no futuro. Gosto da idéia de que ontogênese é ontologia, aquilo que forma, não está do lado de fora das coisas, mas no meio delas.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Giving Birth

This is a month of giving birth: 1. On the first day of the month (my birthday) I sent out my book BUG (Being Up for Grabs) to publisher. A birth-giving moment. 2. On the forth, we started the Journal, called Journal of Questions. It is a Jabèsian and Jarryian endeavor that intends to reflect in many languages about the gaps between thought and translation. It will be available soon. 3. On the 10th, day before yesterday, offspring Devrim A. B. was born. Her name means revolution in Turkish and is a roughly common name. She's very attentive and concentrated - especially on her own fingers that she learned to molest in her youth during her womb months. She was gestated together with BUG. Hope the world enjoys.

My responses to (some) talks in the Book Symposium

Indexicalism is out: l   The book symposium took place two weeks ago with talks by Sofya Gevorkyan/Carlos Segovia, Paul Livingston, Gerson Brea, Steven Shaviro, Chris RayAlexander, Janina Moninska, Germán Prosperi, Gabriela Lafetá, Andrea Vidal, Elzahrã Osman, Graham Harman, Charles Johns, Jon Cogburn, Otavio Maciel, Aha Else, JP Caron, Michel Weber and John Bova. My very preliminary response to some of their talks about the book follows. (Texts will appear in a special issue of Cosmos & History soon). RESPONSES : ON SAYING PARADOXICAL THINGS Hilan Bensusan First of all, I want to thank everyone for their contributions. You all created a network of discussions that made the book worth publishing. Thanks. Response to Shaviro: To engage in a general account of how things are is to risk paradox. Totality, with its different figures including the impersonal one that enables a symmetrical view from nowhere

Hunky, Gunky and Junky - all Funky Metaphysics

Been reading Bohn's recent papers on the possibility of junky worlds (and therefore of hunky worlds as hunky worlds are those that are gunky and junky - quite funky, as I said in the other post). He cites Whitehead (process philosophy tends to go hunky) but also Leibniz in his company - he wouldn't take up gunk as he believed in monads but would accept junky worlds (where everything that exists is a part of something). Bohn quotes Leibniz in On Nature Itself «For, although there are atoms of substance, namely monads, which lack parts, there are no atoms of bulk, that is, atoms of the least possible extension, nor are there any ultimate elements, since a continuum cannot be composed out of points. In just the same way, there is nothing greatest in bulk nor infinite in extension, even if there is always something bigger than anything else, though there is a being greatest in the intensity of its perfection, that is, a being infinite in power.» And New Essays: ... for there is ne