temporal development and articulation of symbols within a
symbolic system the figura.
As the specific modality of the bond, a religious “public”
symbol and the figura have a temporally complex structure.
The symbol does not define exclusively or simply a subjective
or intersubjective perception of and orientation toward a sig-
nificant reality. Nor does the symbol, as the synthesis of the
intentional process of a bipolar dynamic, present merely the
synthetic form of probability of a logical inference. Instead,
being the structure that defines the dynamic of an effective
relation of the intentional bond, the “public” symbol is a
temporal relation of relations in the sense that it defines the
transformation by which the subjective perception emerges
into a form of reciprocity, which is constitutive of an inten-
tional bond.
This process of transformation to public intentional
form corresponds to the epigenesis of a new intentional and
social reality and to the cultural creations that have pro-
duced, through time, a vital bond. The path from a subjec-
tive to a “public” symbol progresses through a symbolic in-
novation, differentiated by the figura. It traces into specific
structures of dominant symbols and into their temporal cor-
relation a sheer sequence from past to future of temporal
symbolic modalities, from the original insight to a condition
of vital presence to a new structural orientation of action that
expresses the time and the creative character of the bond.
The religious figura, itself, has an historical formation that
has come about through the actions of founders, the creativi-
ty of individuals and collective movements that have pro-
duced innovation within a tradition of forms of religious re-
lation. The temporal dimension is intrinsic to the public
symbol because it corresponds to the dynamic structure of
the intentional relation, to its unity and transformation.
Symbols are generated within the intentional relation
and constitute necessary structures and functions by which
the new reality becomes and remains intentional. Formed
within the intentional exchange, symbols are complex facts
that differentiate the generative force of relation. They elabo-
rate the internal principle of causality, the order of necessity,
and the temporal logic that is stated within an intentional
reality.
Because the symbol is both temporal and intentional,
it is possible to interpret the symbolic or religious system not
primarily as a system of signification, as analogical represen-
tation, nor simply as a set of metaphors, but as a processual
structure that elaborates the forms of the “condition of being
in relation” and the dynamics of the nascent state that is cre-
ated within the ultimate intentional relation. The connota-
tive and denotative features of signification that the symbol
clearly presents may, consequently, be seen to be functions
of the primary structure of the symbol as intentional relation.
The temporal function indicates that the symbol is the
constant empirical constituent of the intentional relation.
The religious symbol is a temporal artifact specific to the dy-
namic generated in the intentional relation. It is not an inde-
pendent object but the temporal creativity in which the actu-
al intentional event has its passage to a public, new bond.
This applies not only to the individual symbol but also to
the symbolic system as it is shaped by the interrelation of sa-
cred text, symbolic forms of intentional exchange, and sym-
bolic action.Three theoretical elements, therefore, define symbolic
time, namely, figura, periodicity, and intentional epigenesis.
The “figura” is the set of symbols that are temporally corre-
lated into a periodical system, and it is the original central
structure of time within the intentional event. For this rea-
son, the figura is the minimal unit of analyis of the symbolic
temporal function. Periodicity defines the correlation of the
symbols within a temporal interval. Intentionality, as the re-
lational character of the symbols, is the epigenetic process,
the nascent state of an intentional bond.The temporal function of the figura is the dynamic pro-
cess of a presence that has an intentional character. In the
development from the first insight to an intentional bond,
the figura is directed toward the resolution of the tension be-
tween those factors that are generative of an intentional bond
and those that move in a contrary direction and finally de-
stroy the bond or reduce its vitality. The formation of a
figura and its performance is the result of a sequence of his-
torical choices and actions related to the formation and selec-
tion of symbolic institutional structures. The figura reflects
the experience of long periods of trial and error in the histori-
cal formation of a religious tradition, a sacred history, and
a people. The intentional character of the figura becomes
most evident in the language and action of the sacrifice and
in the formulation of the sacred bond.By formalizing the “relational” aspect of the symbols
and of the development of the figura and by correlating it
with the symbolic, sequential, and performative movement
of the figura, one may specify the intentional character of pe-
riodicity presented by symbolic time.INTENTIONAL EPIGENESIS AND FORMATION OF THE
FIGURA. The process of formation of the religious bond
within a sacred history corresponds to the development of
symbolic structures of a divine encounter and union. De-
fined in its relational character both of divinization and of
incarnation, the development is a process of transcendence
that has the temporal structure of a total object relation. The
total object relation is an intentional action that transforms
the bond from subjective to public. It is a nascent state with-
in the intentional event that guides the passage from an inad-
equate modality of relation (in which the subject attempts
to appropriate the value of life represented by the object and
to negate the intentional value of the object and the constitu-
tive and vital character of the relation) to a modality of the
bond in which the object is restored to its original value as
object of relation. With this epigenetic movement, both sub-
ject and object come to be recognized in their wholeness as8916 SYMBOLIC TIME