manly p hall - wisdom of the knowing ones [1 ebook - pdf]

5/24/2018 Manly P Hall - Wisdom of the Knowing Ones [1 eBook - PDF]

1/177


2/177


3/177

T h e W i s d o m o f t h eK n o w i n g O n es

M A N L Y P . H A L L

G N O S T I C I S M , T H E K E Y T O

E S O T E R I C C H R I S T I A N I T Y


4/177

THE WISDOM OF THE KNOWING ONES: Gnosticism, theKey to Esoteric ChristianityCopyright 2000 by the Philosophical Research Society, Inc. E

All Rights Reserved. Tis book or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form withoutwritten permission from the publisher.

ISBN-10| 0-89314-427-4ISBN-13| 978-0-89314-427-2

Library of Congress Card Number | 99-069476

Cover Art: Abraxas, the Gnostic Pantheos by Augustus J. Knapp, from Manly P. Halls S A A

Cover Layout and Book Design for this Edition: Paul K. Austad

Printed in the United States of America

Published by

THEPHILOSOPHICALRESEARCHSOCIETY

3910 Los Feliz BoulevardLos Angeles, CA 90027 USA

phone| 323.663.2167fax| 323.663.9443website| www.prs.orggeneral inquiries| [email protected] order | [email protected]


5/177

CONTENTS

Page

I ( S A. H) What do the Knowers Know? ................................... 5

C O Gnosticism, the Key to Esoteric Christianity............ 19

C Parallels Between Eastern & Western Philosophy ..... 57

C Alexandria, the Cradle of Western Mysticism........... 83

C F Meditation Symbols in Christian &

Gnostic Mysticism ............................................... 123

C F Te Symbolism of Gnostic Gems........................... 151


6/177

A, A G

P

Te nameA, coinedby Basilides, the EgyptianGnostic, is a word symbolconsisting of seven letterswhich signify the seven cre-ative powers or planetaryangels recognized by theancients. Sampson Arnold

Mackey advances the theorythat the name is compound-ed from two ancient words,

A, which means a bull, and A, which means the pole. o substantiate hisbelief, he brings forward the fact that a motion of the earth, commonly called thealternation of the poles, resulted in the vernal equinox taking place at one time in, the Celestial Bull, over the North Pole. Te four white horses drawingthe chariot of Abraxas symbolize the four ethers by means of which the solar power,

Abraxas, is circulated through all parts of the universe. Te seven-lettered name ofAbraxas is symbolically significant of his seven-rayed power. Tat the modern worldhas any knowledge whatever of ancient Gnostic symbolism is largely due to thecupidity of those individuals who set themselves the task of destroying every intel-ligible record of Gnostic philosophy; for, wishing to keep rather than destroy articlesof commercial value, the fanatics preserved gems upon which Gnostic symbols wereengraved. Te above plate is the enlargement and amplification of a Gnostic jewel,

the original stone being only a trifle over an inch in height. Rings and other articlesof jewelry set with Gnostic gems were undoubtedly used by members of the cult asmeans of identification. As the order was a secret society, the designs were small andinconspicuous.

F Te Secret eachings of All Ages M P. H.A, A J. K.


7/177

5

I n t r o d u c t i o n

W H A T D O T H E K N OW E R S K N OW ?

In December, 1945, an Egyptian Arab countryman madea momentous archeological discovery in Upper Egypt. Noone knows precisely where the man Mohammed Ali madehis discovery. It appears that he had several reasons for con-cealing the location of his find. oday, it is generally agreedthat the discovery was made somewhere in the vicinity ofthe present town of Nag Hammadi, near which was locatedin early Christian times the first and largest of all Christianmonastic communities, the compound of Chenoboskion,founded by the sainted Coptic monk, Pachomius.

Mohammed Alis discovery consisted of a large, red

earthenware jar, containing thirteen papyrus books, boundin leather. Legend has it that when the jar was broken by thediscoverers mattock, a cloud of golden dust rose into the airand disappeared from sight, as if a long-confined presencehad at last found its way into the light of day. Tis incidentof possible synchronistic import signaled the arrival of anera of unprecedented interest in a particular early variety ofChristianity, known as Gnosticism.

Te discovery of the Nag Hammadi Library, as the col-lection of Gnostic treatises became known, was followed lessthan a year later by the unearthing of the Dead Sea Scrolls


8/177

6

The Wisdom of the Knowing Ones

at Khirbet Qumran, in the Holy Land. As the years and

decades rolled on, it became increasingly evident that thesetwo archaeological finds were in some ways related: one con-cerned the teachings of the early Christian schools of Gnos-tics, while the other contained the writings of heterodoxJewish mystics of a slightly earlier period, who seemed tohave a good deal in common with their Gnostic Christiandescendants. Te existence of a secret or semi-secret tradi-

tion of esoteric religiosity within the Semitic spiritual matrixthus emerged as a very real possibility.

It is well known that some esotericists in our culturehave long believed in the existence of such a secret tradition.Groups and individuals such as the Cathars, Rosicrucians,Knights emplar, Esoteric Freemasons and Teosophists of-

ten considered themselves as functioning within a traditionthat could be traced back to the initiates of the Gnosticsand the Essenes as well as to the Neo-Platonists and the vo-taries of the Egyptian Hermes. Te late Manly P. Hall, forinstance, wrote prolifically and insightfully about this Adepttradition, in his volumes about the Orders of the Quest, Or-ders of Universal Reformation, Orders of the Great Work, and

others.While many believed in such a tradition, few could point

to the precise sources and documentary evidence concerningthese esoteric currents, especially when it came to the teach-ings and practices of the Gnostics. For over a millenniumand a half the only information available concerning the

Gnostics was to be found in the writings of certain Churchfathers, who wrote polemical treatises against the Gnostics.o gather accurate information from such sources was highlyunlikely. Tese writers, or heresiologists were the very folkwho relentlessly attacked and ultimately incited the repres-


9/177

7

Introduction

sion of the Gnostics. Tey assailed, ridiculed and greatly dis-

torted the message of the Gnostic teachers, making them ap-pear as fools and knaves of an invariably reprehensible kind.In the late Eighteenth and early Nineteenth Centuries andthereafter, a small number of original documents of Gnosticprovenance appeared in Europe, having been brought thereby travelers from the Middle East.

By the end of the Nineteenth Century the few now avail-able Gnostic documents impelled many scholars to abandonreliance on the biased heresiological sources which were con-sidered normative earlier. Books, such as those by the Ger-man scholars von Harnack, Richard Reitzenstein and Wal-ter Bauer, and their English and French colleagues, broughtabout a change in Gnostic studies. Neither were the mem-

bers of esoteric orders and societies idle at this time. MadameBlavatsky and her brilliant pupil, G.R.S. Mead did much tostimulate enthusiastic interest in the Gnostics, while Frenchesotericists led by Papus (Gerard Encausse) and Jules Doinelwent so far as reconstituting the Gnostic Church, which inseveral variants continues to the present day.

However, none of the aforementioned could rival thecoming of the Nag Hammadi Library and its aftermath. Tenew epoch of research sparked by this wealth of documentscame to extend gradually far beyond the halls of academe.At the turn of the wentieth to the wenty-first Century wefind novels, works of popular scholarship, science fiction,magazine articles and web-pages on the Internet in consider-

able profusion proliferating in the public arena, engenderingfurther interest in Gnosticism.

It is high time, therefore, that we all inquire into the sub-stance of the teachings and practices of the Gnostics.


10/177

8


TH E KN O W E R S A N D TH E I R KN O W L E D G E

Until comparatively recently few people were familiarwith the word, Gnostic; a rather larger number was ac-quainted with its antonym, agnostic. Both are derivedfrom the Greek Gnosis, usually translated as knowledge.An agnostic is thus a non-knower, i.e. one who denies allknowledge of ultimate realities, while a Gnostic is one whoprofesses knowledge of such things. One needs to keep inmind, however, that Gnosis is not primarily rational knowl-edge; it has little to do with philosophical reasoning andeven less is it associated with such matters as our contempo-rary, computer-related obsession with access to data. ElainePagels, author of the splendid work, Te Gnostic Gospels,translates the term Gnosis, as used by the Gnostics, as in-

sight, a term denoting both psychological and metaphysicalcognition arrived at intuitively.

Contemporary scholarship holds that what we callGnosticism was a diverse movement, showing many com-plex characteristics. Yet, it is quite evident that this wealth ofdiversity in myth, teaching and perhaps in practice possessesan undeniable central core. While there may have been nu-merous Gnostic teachers and schools, this does not mitigateagainst the fact that there was one Gnosticism; what unitedthe various Gnostic orientations was more important thanwhat divided them. It is also important to keep in mind thatone of the uniting factors was a common dedication to thefounder of the Christian tradition, Jesus Christ.

For the sake of clarity it is useful to confine the termGnostic to the kind of person we see in the Nag Ham-madi writings; a Christian, albeit of a singularly creative andheterodox kind, especially when compared with Christiansof so-called mainstream orthodoxy. It is true that the term


11/177

9

Introduction

Gnosis and much of the basic Gnostic view of reality were

shared by people who were not Christians, but these pa-gan Gnostics should properly be called Hermeticists, forthey employed the figure of the Greco-Egyptian Hermes astheir savior, very much like the Christian Gnostics were todo with Jesus. It is also legitimate to speak of somethingthat Gershom Scholem has tentatively described as JewishGnosticism but the accurate name for its earlier develop-

ment may be Essene and Merkabah mysticism and for itslater manifestation one may properly use the term Kab-balah.

An important question that is in need of an answer is:How did the Gnostics come by their unique and unusualworldview? In the past it was customary to seek the origins

of Gnosticism in objective external influences and trans-missions. Te contemporary view is rather different fromthis. Te British scholar E.R. Dodds has suggested as longas forty years ago that the writings of the Gnostics derivedfrom mystical experience. Te great psychologist C.G. Junghas made the same suggestion, and following his lead, theDutch scholar Gilles Quispel proposed that Gnosticism

originated in the experience of the ontological self, a pro-cess that might appear both psychological and mystical. Tisexperience, wrote Quispel, does not lend itself to prosaic ordogmatic description and definition. Rather, it may be pro-jected outward in the form of mystically inspired religiousmythology.

It is without doubt that the majority of the Gnostic writ-ings bear the character of such inspired mythology. In thewake of the work of several great scholars of mythology inour day people have come to view myths in a much morepositive light than had been the case earlier. Once it was


12/177

10


generally believed that a myth is naught but an untrue story;

today many feel that myths communicate truths which can-not be adequately conveyed in any other fashion. It is alsoworthy of note that one of the greatest mythologists of recentdecades, Karl Kerenyi, specifically pinpointed the myths ofthe Gnostics as originating in mystical experience, a circum-stance that distinguishes them from such derivative mythsas those of Homer. oday there can be little doubt about the

likelihood of the great Gnostic teachers having been inspiredmystics who experienced realities not accessible to mortalsunder ordinary circumstances. Valentinus, Basilides, Bardai-san and their followers were much more than idle specula-tors as the heresiologist Church Fathers claimed.

TH E GN O S T I C WO R L D VI E W

While Gnosticism thus may be said to originate in mysti-cal experience, this does not mean that all mystical experi-ence results in Gnosticism. Tere are certain similarities, tobe sure, between the recognitions of a St. John of the Crossor a St. eresa of Avila and the mysticism of Valentinus; butthe former share an orthodox Roman Catholic world view

(albeit one with which dogmatists are often uncomfort-able), while the latter is Gnostic in his outlook. It seems thatGnosticism expresses a specific religious mystical experiencewhich then finds expression in teachings, most often embod-ied in mythology. All Gnostic teachings and mythologemsare indicative of insights of great metaphysical and psycho-logical subtlety; they are never to be understood in simple

declarative terms and even less in dogmatic terms.

In the following summary, we will encapsulate in inad-equate prose what the Gnostic myths express in their intui-tive and imaginative style. ogether, these recognitions addup to what may be called the Gnostic World View.


13/177

11

Introduction

C O N C E R N I N G T H E C O S M O S

Te imperfections of the world are an issue that practi-cally all traditions have addressed. Where the traditions dif-fer is in what they suggest might be done about it. OrthodoxChristians are agreed that we live in a fallen world whichwe shall leave behind at our death. Modern secularists haveprofessed a dedication to what they were pleased to regardas the improvement of the world, and in so doing they pre-cipitated frightful world wars, holocausts and revolutions.Gnostics, on the other hand, had their ownperhaps quitestartlingview of these matters; they held that the world isflawed because it was created in a flawed manner. Tey alsoheld that the only substantial and effective way to improvethe world is the one that leads to the improvement of hu-

man consciousness through the insight of Gnosis.Te Gnostic world view is sometimes characterized as

anti-cosmic, but in reality it is merely critical of the cosmos,because of its numerous flaws. Like Buddhists, Gnosticscame to the recognition that earthly life is filled with suffer-ing. Some of this suffering is undoubtedly of our own doing,but certainly most of it originates in the natural or cosmicorder itself. Why do virtually all creatures sustain themselvesby eating each other? Why are living beings destroyed bynatural catastrophes? Why do humans, in addition to allother difficulties, also suffer depression, alienation and bore-dom? Because the causes of these and other conditions areinherent in the fabric of the worldso said the Gnostics.

C O N C E R N I N G G OD

Te Gnostic concept of Deity is more subtle than thatof most religions. Modern minds are often puzzled by theGnostic concept of God, but a thoughtful evaluation of this


14/177

12


concept discloses that it is neither unreasonable nor improb-

able. o properly appreciate the Gnostic view of Deity onemust remember that the Gnostics originated within theSemitic monotheistic religious matrix. Unlike members ofsuch schools of pagan Gnosis as Hermeticism, or Neopla-tonism, the Gnostics were confronted with the image of themonotheistic God of the Old estament and with the ad-aptations of this image in the New estament. Tey faced a

God who not only created the universe but micromanagedit as its lawgiver, policeman, judge and executioner, and,who, moreover, performed these tasks in a capricious, oftenwrathful and illogical manner. Te greatest of all questionsthe Gnostics asked was this: Is this flawed creator truly theultimate, true and good God? Or might he be a lesser de-ity, a sort of large, but not very wise angel, who has becomeeither ignorant of a greater power beyond himself or is animpostor, impersonating the universal God?

Te Gnostics answered these questions by saying thatthis creator is obviously not the ultimate, true God, butrather a demiurgos (craftsman), an intermediate, secondarydeity. Above and beyond this intermediate deity there is a

true, ultimate, real and good Reality, which or who can beeffectively addressed and experienced by the human spirit.oday, a large number of people either dont believe in anyGod at all, or they have managed to so whitewash the imageof the monotheistic God that they feel no need to engage inthe distinctions which occupied the minds of the Gnostics.Still, judged on its own merits, the issue of the dichotomyof the lesser and the greater God may be still considered asworthy of attention.

TH E HU M A N P R E D I C A M E N T

Te abundance of the now available Gnostic texts makes


15/177

13

Introduction

one thing clear: Te Gnostics had an unique and insight-

ful view of the human being. Existentialist philosophy, Jun-gian and ranspersonal Psychology, as well as such Easternreligious traditions as Hinduism and Buddhism, all showvarious degrees of affinity to Gnosticism, particularly whenit comes to the Gnostic teachings concerning the humanbeing.

Te Gnostics held that human nature mirrors the dualityfound in the world. In part it was made by the false creatorand in part it consists of the light of the rue God. Withinthe human dwells a divine spark, a spirit that is older thanthe created world and all in it. Much of the time we are ig-norant of the divine spark resident within us. o awaken tothe recognition of this presence involves overcoming pow-

erful obstacles which seem to be built into our own natureand into the environment within which we exist. Gnosticwisdom has often alluded to the possibility that these ob-stacles may in some ways be connected with the powers thatmanage certain aspects of the universe, and whose dominionover us might be threatened by our Gnosis. Te Apostle Paul(whom Elaine Pagels justly called the Gnostic Paul) may

have referred to this circumstance when he wrote that westruggle not against flesh and blood, but against spiritualwickedness in high places. Death releases the divine sparkfrom its lowly prison, but such release may be only tem-porary unless liberating knowledge has come to the humanwhile still on earth.

Men and women are divided into three categories thatresemble modern psychological types. A small number arespiritual (pneumatics) who are ready for Gnosis and libera-tion. On the opposite end of the psycho-spiritual scale wefind those who are earthbound and materialistic (hyletics)


16/177

14


and who recognize only physical reality. Between these two

poles, as it were, we find those who live largely in their men-tal-emotional nature (psychics). Such people expect rules ofconduct to redeem them instead of aspiring to higher, sal-vific states of consciousness. In many cases one may note acertain development that people undergo and that movesfrom materialistic slavery to the senses, by way of ethical re-ligiosity, to spiritual freedom brought by liberating Gnosis.

As the noted scholar of Gnosticism, Gilles Quispel wrote:Te world-spirit in exile must go through the inferno ofmatter and the purgatory of morals to arrive at the spiritualParadise.

Te Gnostics held that the essential nature of the hu-man is divine. Mainstream orthodoxy, then as now, believes

that the soul of the human is a creation, forever differentin nature from the Deity. Not unlike Hinduism and Bud-dhism, who recognize a transcendental Buddha Nature orAtman respectively in the human, Gnosticism looks uponmen and women as gods and goddesses who have forgottenwho they are. Humans are caught in a predicament whereinthe limitations imposed by physical existence are combined

with a triple ignorance: ignorance of our origins, of our truenature, and of our ultimate destiny. It is from this predica-ment that the Gnostic aspires to be freed by Gnosis.

SA LVAT I O N THRO U GH KN O W L E D G E

An early Gnostic statement defines the nature of Gnosisin the following manner: What makes us free is the Gnosis

of who we were

of what we have become

of where we were

of wherein we have been cast


17/177

15

Introduction

of whereto we are hastening

of what we are being freed of what birth really is

of what rebirth really is.

Te person who intuitively receives accurate answers tothese questions is receiving liberating Gnosis. Inasmuch asit is ignorance that keeps us enslaved, it is obvious that the

kind of knowledge which removes ignorance, brings aboutour liberation. It is as if we were enmeshed in a great, maleficcocoon, and with the coming of such knowledge the cocoonbegan to unravel, until at last we could stand again in thesunlight of the true God, freed from our fetters.

It might be assumed by some that this liberating Gnosis

can be achieved by the individual without any outside aid.Such, however, was not the understanding of the Gnostics.o be liberated from our predicament, we require help, al-though we certainly must contribute our own efforts.

Orthodox Christians believe that Jesus incarnated in or-der to save them by his suffering and death. Gnostics alwaysheld that Jesus came into this world as their helper so thatwith His aid they might attain to liberating Gnosis. Nei-ther did Gnostics hold that Jesus was the only such salvifichelper to appear in the long course of human history. Fromearliest times Messengers of the Light have come forth fromthe true God in order to assist humans in their quest forsalvific knowledge. Some of the messianic figures of this sort

mentioned in Gnostic scriptures are: Seth (the third son ofAdam), Jesus, and in the later Gnostic movement, the Ira-nian prophet Mani.

Gnostics never looked to salvation from sin (original orother), but rather they desired release from unconscious-


18/177

16


ness and incomprehension, whereby they meant primarily

ignorance of spiritual realities. Salvation, (or liberation) isa potential present in every man and woman, and it is notvicarious but individual. Te great Messengers of the Lightcome to stimulate this potential and they do so not by theirdeath but by their lives. Te ministry of these Messengers istwofold: first, they bring us teachings which lead our mindsand hearts to Gnosis: and, second, they confer liberating

mysteries, which with their mystic grace bring the fullness ofliberating Gnosis which is thus sealed in our spirits forever.

Te nature of Gnostic liberating mysteries has been amatter of conjecture for a very long time. Many scholarsof the last two centuries were unfavorably disposed towardboth myth and sacrament. Frequently they relegated the

mythic and the sacramental aspect of Gnosticism to eithersome sort of early immature developments which were de-signed to mature into philosophy, or on the other hand, theyregarded them as phenomena indicating decadence. Te lat-est research has proven all of these contentions wrong. Mythand sacrament were not incidental byproducts of Gnosticspirituality but were its heart and essence. Te Gospel of

Philip of the Nag Hammadi collection presents us with anentire volume of Gnostic sacramental theology; other in-dications of sacramental Gnosis are ubiquitous in the cur-rently available documents. Gnosticism is thus revealed as atradition, possessing its own myths and its own sacramentalmysteries, its own priesthood and spiritual lineage leadingback to the great Gnostic teachers of old. Tose who expecta totally individualistic, spontaneous spirituality unmedi-ated by tradition and formal content in Gnosticism will bedisappointed.

oday we are experiencing what might be called a modest


19/177

17

Introduction

Gnostic renaissance. Te possibility exists that the Gnostic

Renaissance at the end of the wentieth and at the beginningof the wenty-first Centuries may in some ways represent aparallel to the Hermetic-Humanistic Renaissance of the Fif-teenth and Sixteenth Centuries. As the then newly rediscov-ered Hermetic literature fueled the great cultural rebirth ofthat historical epoch, so the similar rediscovery of the Gnos-tic scriptures in our period may lead to similar results. Te

stone that the builders rejected may become the cornerstoneonce more; what the blindness of churchly politics rejectednearly two thousand years ago may find its way into thespirituality of the new century and new millennium. Be thatas it may, books that bring us closer to the wisdom of theGnostics ought to be welcomed. When such a book comesto us from the pen of one of the wise men of this age, ManlyP. Hall, it is to be welcomed with particular joy.

Te following treatise authored by the late Manly P. Hall

consists of several inter-related essays concerning the Gnos-tics. As indicated by the subtitle of his work, our authorregarded Gnosticism as the key to Esoteric Christianity. Forthis insight alone we ought to congratulate him most pro-fusely. Indeed, there can be no Esoteric Christianity with-out Gnosticism, for in a very real sense the Wisdom of theKnowing Ones is the original Esoteric Christianity itself.

ake away the contribution of the Gnostics, and all thenon-mainstream spiritual structures of alternative mysticalChristianity fall like a house of cards. Anyone calling himselfan Esoteric Christian who disregards the Gnostics remainsignorant of the best and greatest resource of the alternative


20/177

18


approach to the inner core of the Christian faith.

oday we know that Gnosticism is very much alive. InIraq and Iran there lives a substantial religious minorityknown as the Mandaeans, who are ancient Semitic Gnosticswho have survived into our days. Also, much informationhas come to light in recent years concerning the great andnoble religion of the Cathars, or Albigensians, who practicedtheir explicitly Gnostic religion openly during the MiddleAges in Europe. Tough cruelly exterminated by the min-ions of the particularly unenlightened Catholicism of theirday, some of these Gnostics also survived and have contin-ued their religious life. In many ways and forms Gnosticswalk in the light of day again.

Te writer of this introduction wishes to felicitate the

Philosophical Research Society and its president, Dr. Oba-diah Harris, for deciding to publish this work. Tis intro-duction was certainly also intended to serve as a tribute tothe late Manly P. Hall, whose memory continues to live forall of us who have known him or have studied his works.

Stephan A. Hoeller


21/177

19

C h a p t e r O n e

G N O S T I C I S M , T H E K E Y T O

E S O T E R I C C H R I S T I A N I T Y

In the first century of the Christian era the intellectualworld was extending its inquiries along the lines set downby the teachings of Plato and Aristotle. Plato had set up thedoctrine of causes. His philosophy was devoted to those

larger and general truths which may be defined collectivelyas universals. Trough him the conception of an organizeduniverse was introduced to Mediterranean civilization. Tisorganization originated in archetypes, that is, grand patternsin causes. Tese patterns, formed by the terms and elementsof a divine geometry, enclosed material life within a network

of cosmic energies.Aristotle, reacting dramatically to the Platonic challenge,

was endowed by nature with an organization of facultieswhich resented the domination of intangibles. He did notdeny the Platonic scheme of things and held that Platos vi-


22/177

20


sion was unassailable; not necessarily because it was true,

but because the elements involved were beyond the attack ofintellectual criticism. Aristotle loved to argue, but argumentabout intangibles could not be conclusive. He could not winhis argument on Platos grounds.

Seeking a more substantial footing, Aristotle emphasizedthe significance of tangibles. Here was a sphere of obviousfacts. Tere was room for argument in matters of implica-tion, but the facts themselves were incontrovertible. Tus hefound security in the contemplation of the knowable. He setup an organization in nature by reducing the facts and theirreasonable extensions into categories. He challenged Platoto come down to earth and meet him on the level of thingsknown.

Tere is no indication that Plato accepted the challenge.Although the men were in close association, there never wasa complete meeting of the minds, and as a consequence, sub-sequent generations inherited a legacy of unfinished busi-ness. Universals were defined, particulars were organizedand classified, but the interval between universals and par-ticulars became a more and more important consideration.

It was this interval between invisible causes and visibleeffects that burdened the intellectual world during the FirstCentury A.D. Te human mind engaged in the systematicprocess of building bridges to link cause to effect and effectto cause.

Te two extremes were in themselves irreconcilable, at

least mentally. But in nature itself they were reconciled.Tere must be an explanation to fit the facts. Tis was thebroad challenge in the world of thought, and it resulted inthe creation of a school of intellectuals who became the lead-ers of a revolutionary discovery in the sphere of mind. Tis


23/177

21

Gnosticism, the Key to Esoteric Christianity

discovery produced Gnosticism, and the group supporting

the new solution to the pressing dilemma was known as theGnostics.

Gnosticism is defined as emanationism, or a philosophyof emanations. If two qualities cannot meet in substance,they can be brought together only by extension. Universalscannot become particulars and particulars cannot becomeuniversals, but universals exist according to degrees and par-ticulars exist according to conditions.

For example, the ancients recognized four elements as-cending from the most solid, which was earth, to the mostdense, which was air. Te ascending order of the elementscaused the highest to be the least material. Tat which isleast material is most like that which is spiritual; thus mat-

ter exists in an ascending scale of conditions, qualifications,modifications and rarefactions of itself.

Spirit, which is the common substance of universals,likewise exists according to states. Spirit per se, that is, in itsown nature, is unknowable. But from spirit proceed thingsspiritual according to a descending order. Intellect is an

intangible pertaining to the order of spirit, yet to a degreeit has formal dimension and proportion and is subject todefinition. Energy, or force as it was known in old times, islikewise an extension of spirit, but this extension is subjectto greater limitations than intellect because it is definable.All definitions define natures according to their limitations.Axiomatically, definition is limitation.

A descending order of spiritual qualities, less spiritual asthey depart from their own substance and cause, is thereforeacceptable by the mind. Conversely, an ascending order ofthings material, less material as they depart from their sub-stance and source, matter, is also appreciable to the reason.


24/177

22


What could be more reasonable, therefore, than to assume

that the two opposites can meet on a common ground.Of course emanationism assumes the existence of two co-

eternal realities, one spiritual and the other material. Tis,Aristotle would allow, for he regarded matter as immortal,without beginning or end. He also accepted the eternity ofspirit. Te existence of two eternal principles endeared Aris-totle to the Churchmen because they found in his doctrinethe comfort they sought for their own belief in the eternityof good and evil and the endless warfare between God andthe Devil.

A number of modern scientists are also inclined to favorAristotles philosophical anthropomorphism. Whether ornot spirit exists belongs to the sphere of uncertainties, but,

the eternity of matter is a comforting thought for those seek-ing something permanent in an impermanent universe.

Interesting speculation can result from such questions as,Is spirit the highest degree of matter? Or, Is matter thelowest degree of spirit? Tis brings complications, however.Are spirit and matter qualities of one essence differing only

in degree, or are they two utterly irreconcilable opposites forwhich no common denominator exists? If the two extremesare equally inevitable and indestructible, which is the supe-rior? Has either any need for the other? Is the action of spiritupon matter a kind of cosmic incident or accident, and canmatter modify spirit? Te Scholastics struggled with theseissues for centuries, and the results, though stimulating to

the intellectual faculties, were far from solutional of anypractical problem.

Plato held that matter was an extension of spiritthatpart of universal being most remote from the spiritual qual-ity. He used the analogy of light and darkness. Light is a


25/177

23


principle, but darkness is not a principleit is merely the

absence of light. Te Aristotelians, not to be outdone, sug-gested the possibility that darkness could be a principle andthat light could equally well be regarded as the absence ofdarkness. Light was incidental; darkness was inevitable.Light could temporarily dispel darkness, but all light mustultimately fail, and in the failure of light the eternity ofdarkness was revealed.

Te vital element of precedence was also involved. Didlight precede darkness or did darkness precede light? Tatwhich precedes must inevitably include that which suc-ceeds it. Did darkness contain the potential of light, or didlight contain the potential of darkness? Most systems inferthat darkness preceded light and is therefore more ancient,

more universal, and more real. Suns are foci of light set upin darkness, but in quantity, darkness always exceeds lightbecause light is always surrounded by an immeasurable areacomposed of the absence of light.

Is absence then greater than presence? Presence alwaysexists in a field consisting of the absence of itself. One condi-tion is not definable without the other. Tey are co-eternaland co-dependent, with absence always in excess of presence.

It is like the problem of food and appetite. Hunger isthe absence of food. Food is the solution of hunger. Food isreal and definable. Hunger has no dimension or appearance.Which then, is the reality? Food will remove hunger, butonly for the time being. No matter how much food there

may be, hunger remains, and it is necessary to miss only afew meals to reveal its eternal presence.

If light is food and darkness is hunger, which is the morereal? Food is a temporary solution to an eternal problem. Allthis is very confusing.


26/177

24


If darkness is equivalent to space, then light may be

equivalent to time. Tis again presents a variety of complica-tions. Can time exist without its space equivalent, eternity?Is eternity the emptiness of time or the fullness of time? Isit all or nothing? If it is all time, then eternity or space is su-perior to time. If eternity is the privation of time, then timeis the reality and eternity is merely an illusion of the mind.Tere is an illusion here somewhere, but which of these ab-

stractions is the stronger depends upon which school youbelong to.

Te early Christian concept of God further complicatedthe already confused picture. Most pagan systems of reli-gious philosophy conceived of the supreme spiritual poweras identical with the substance and nature of space. Tus the

space dimension was regarded as complete fullness. o ourphysical perceptions space is emptiness, properly describedas nothing.

o the pagans this nothing was simply no thing.It wasnot emptiness but the abstraction of forms. It was universallife unconditioned, unmanifested, undifferentiated, and inits own essential state, undefinable.

Te early Christian Church regarded Deity as outsideof the plan of creation. God was a person, separate fromthe world, which he had formed. Tis divinity ruled theuniverse from some extra-universal throne. God exerciseddespotism over matter, molding it into a variety of forms.Each of these forms was ensouled by a separate life principle,

which descended to it from the nature of Deity. Tus, to thepagans, God was a power emerging through the processesof spiritual and material generations. But to the Christians,he was a separate and alien force, controlling the creationalprocesses by an absolute tyranny of the divine will.


27/177

25


Te Gnostics belonged among the pagan groups inas-

much as they believed the universe to be the body of Godthrough which the spiritual power manifested as a constantimpulse toward unfoldment and growth. At the same time,the Gnostics attempted an explanation of Christian mysti-cal philosophy according to a basically pagan tradition. Inthis way, the Gnostic cult succeeded in offending both thepagans and the Christians. Each felt that its viewpoint was

compromised.Gnosticism was the great heresy of the Ante-Nicene pe-

riod of church history. Te fathers of primitive Christianity,having elected themselves the sole custodians of salvation,exercised this prerogative to stamp out all traces of Christi-anity as a philosophical code. Tey particularly resented the

Gnostics because these essentially pagan thinkers insistedupon pointing out the non-Christian sources and elements,which had contributed to the rise of the Christian sect.

Te early bishops, saints and martyrs, such as Irenaeus,Hippolytus, Epiphanius, ertullian and Teodoret, dividedtheir activities between the somewhat diversified tasks ofpreaching brotherly love, and a gospel of charity and pietyon the one hand, while on the other hand, formulating vi-cious and slanderous attacks upon the members of all dis-senting creeds.

No pious ante-Nicene Father had proved his zeal, andincidentally, his bigotry, until he had prepared an elaboratetreatise against heresies, and pitched a sanctified pebble at

some heresiarch.All good Churchmen sought to demonstrate that pagans

in general, and Gnostics in particular, were promulgators ofhateful and misleading doctrines. It was intimated and insome cases actually affirmed, that a perverse spirit (the faith-


28/177

26


ful old Devil) had raised up teachers of false doctrines in an

effort to compromise the infallible revelations of the apostlesand their legitimate descendents. Tus, the learned Fathers,who incidentally seemed better informed on heresies thanorthodoxies, refuted all of the doctrines of the heretics withone grand gesture.

It may be seen, therefore, that the Gnostics occupied anextremely precarious position. Tey were reconcilers of ex-treme differences, and the way of the peacemaker is usu-ally quite as hard as that of the transgressor. Gnosticismwas despised by the Church because it sought to interpretChristian mysticism in terms of the metaphysical systems ofthe Greeks, Egyptians, and Chaldeans. At the same time, itwas openly opposed by contemporary pagan philosophers,

particularly certain Neoplatonists, because it appeared to ac-cept, at least in part, the unphilosophic and illogical tenetsforced upon an unsuspecting world by the Christian enthu-siasts. Attacked from both sides, and gradually crushed bythe sheer weight of numbers, Gnosticism finally passed intolimbo after a desperate struggle for existence over a periodof several centuries.

Strange to relate, Gnosticism is indebted to its enemiesfor the survival of certain of its teachings. Until compara-tively recently, all the information available on the subject ispreserved in the writings of those excited and irritable ante-Nicene Fathers who went into elaborate details concerningthe substance of the heresies they condemned. Although the

Gnostics have vanished from the earth, the analogies, whichthey established between Christian and pagan doctrines,have proved invaluable to students of comparative religion.

Among the names that stand out in the chronicles ofGnosticism, three are outstanding: Simon Magus, Basilides


29/177

27


and Valentinus. Tey have been men of exceptional bril-

liance, for they were singled out by the Church Fathers asthe objects of particular and continued persecution. SimonMagus, the Syrian Gnostic, was subjected to an especiallyspiteful and unchristian tirade of abuse. His character wastorn to shreds, and he was held up to public scorn, not onlyas a sorcerer but as a horrible example of the depth of spiri-tual, moral, and physical depravity into which an individual

can descend.Basilides and Valentinus were both men of such excep-

tional personal integrity that even the careful combings ofthe clergy were not able to bring to light anything that couldbe interpreted as depreciatory. It was evident, therefore, that

these philosophers

were heresiarchs ofthe most dangerouskind. Tey were themore deadly becausethey concealed theirdiabolical perversi-ties behind an ap-

pearance of virtueand integrity. If apagan had the ap-

pearance of virtue it was because the Devil conjured up anillusion in the hope of thus undermining the omnipotenceof the Church.

If any group, which shared in the Christian mystery, pos-sessed the esoteric secrets of the early Church, it was theGnostics. Tis order preserved to the end the high ethicaland rational standards which confer honor upon a teaching.Te Church therefore attacked Gnosticism vigorously and

G A S


30/177

28


relentlessly, recognizing these mystical philosophers as being

the most formidable adversaries to the temporal power ofChristian theology.

In summing up the doctrine of Gnosticism, it is not pos-sible to consider the numerous divisions which took placewithin the sect, nor the more intricate elements of its systems.From a simple cult, Gnosticism evolved into an elaborateand complex philosophy, uniting within its own structurethe essential factor of several great religions. Te central ideaof Gnosticism was the ascent of the soul through successivestages of being. Tis doctrine probably originated in the as-trolatry of Babylon with its doctrine of a series of heavens,each under the rulership of a planetary god. Te soul mustascend through these heavens and their gates by means of

magical passwords delivered to the guardians of the doors.Tis viewpoint is reminiscent of the Egyptian ritual of thedead.

Te ladder of the worlds upon which souls ascend anddescend is described in the Babylonian myth of ammuzand Ishtar. It appears also in the Poimandres of Hermesrismegistus, where seven planetary governors sit upon theseven concentric circles of the world through which soulsascend and descend. Here, likewise, is the symbolism of Ja-cobs ladder, the nine royal arches of Enoch, and the sevenheavens of the Revelations of St. John. Te commentariesupon Mohammeds Night Journey to Heaven, describe howthe Prophet of Islam, after climbing a ladder of golden cords

hanging above the emple of Jerusalem, passed throughseven gates at each of which stood one of the patriarchs ofthe Old estament.

Tere is much in Gnosticism to intrigue the orientalist.Bardesanes, the last of the great Gnostics, may have been


31/177

29


influenced by Buddhistic metaphysics. Tis is particularly

evident in that part of the teaching of the cult in whichChrist is described descending through the seven worlds onhis way to physical incarnation. Like the Buddha, he ensoulsa body on each of the seven planes, thus literally becom-ing all things unto all men. Te ultimate condition of con-sciousness to which Gnosticism aspires is also reminiscentof Buddhist doctrine. Te soul is finally absorbed into an

abstract state perfectly analogous to nirvana, so that the endof existence is the condition of not-being.

Valentinus, the Gnostic, in his vision of the order of cre-ation, wrote: I behold all things suspended in air by spirit,and I perceive all things wafted by spirit; the flesh I see sus-pended from soul, but the soul shining out from air, and

air depends upon aether, and fruits produced from Bythos(profundity), and the foetus born from the womb. Tis isGnostic emanationism, the birth of all natures from theirown superiors, and creation itself emerging from its owncause, the absolute or the profundity.

In the simplest arrangement of the Gnostic concept of thegodhead, we find first the universal Logos. He who stood,stands, and will stand. By nature and substance unknow-able, he is the incorruptible form who projects from himselfan image, and this image ordains all things. From his owneternal soul and imperishable nature Tat Which Abidesemits three hypostases, which Simon Magus called Incor-ruptible Form, the Great Tought, and theUniversal Mind.

It is interesting here to note that as in many esoteric sys-tems, thought precedes mind, or as the ancients said, Tethought conceives the thinker. Among the later Gnostics,the godhead is represented by three potencies in this man-ner:


32/177

30


Anthropos(the man)

Anthropos, son of Anthropos(the man, son of the man)

Ialdabaoth (the son of chaos)

Ialdabaoth, who corresponds to Zeus in Orphic and Pla-tonic metaphysics, is called the Demiurge, or the Lord ofthe World. Te Gnostics believed that it was this Demiurge,

to whom Jesus referred when he spoke of the prince of theworld who had nothing in common with him. Te Demi-urge was the personification of matter, the monad of the ma-terial sphere, the seed of the world within, which locked thepatterns of all generated things. Ialdabaoth gave birth out ofhimself to six sons, who together with their father, becamethe seven planetary spirits. Tese were called the seven ar-

chons (governors) and correspond with the guardians of theworld described by Hermes. Teir names in order accordingto Origen are as follows:

Ialdabaoth(Saturn)

Iao (Jupiter)

Sabaoth (Mars)

Adonaios (the Sun)

Astaphaios (Venus)

Ailoaios(Mercury)

Oraios (the Moon)

Here Ialdabaoth becomes the outer boundary of the

Solar System, the orbit of Saturn within which the otherplanets exist as embryos in ascending order of powers. Tuswe understand the Greek fable of Saturn devouring his ownchildren, for the ancients believed that planetary substancewas finally drawn into the rings of Saturn from which it was


33/177

31


finally scattered into space.

In the hermetic allegory the seven guardians of theworldthe builders, or Elohim of the Jewswere simplymanifesters of divine purpose, in themselves neither goodnor bad. According to the Gnostics, however, Ialdabaoth andhis six sons were proud and opposing spirits who, like Luci-fer and his rebels, sought to establish a kingdom in the abysswhich should prevail against the kingdom of God. Hencewe find Ialdabaoth crying out triumphantly, Tere are noother gods before me! when in reality he is the least part ofthe triune godhead and beyond him extends the spheres ofthe Father and the Son.

In his rare and valuable text Te Gnostics and their Re-mains, C. W. King sums up the Gnostic genesis. His re-

marks are in substance as follows:Sophia Achamoth, the generative wisdom of the world

was lured into the abyss by beholding her reflection in thedeep. Trough union with the darkness, she gave birth toa sonIaldabaoth, the child of chaos and the egg. SophiaAchamoth, being herself of a spiritual nature, suffered horri-

bly from her contact with matter, and after an extraordinarystruggle, she escaped out of the muddy chaos which hadthreatened to swallow her up. Although unacquainted withthe mystery of the pleromathat all-including space whichwas the abode of her mother the heavenly Sophia, or divinewisdomSophia Achamoth reached the middle distancebetween the above and below. Tere she succeeded in shak-

ing off the material elements, which had clung like mud toher spiritual nature. After cleansing her being, she built astrong barrier between the world of intelligences or spirits,which are above, and the world of ignorance and matter,which stretched out below.


34/177

32


Left to his own contrivances, Ialdabaoth, the son of cha-

os, became the creator of the physical part of the world; thatpart in which sin temporarily prevailed because the light ofvirtue was swallowed up in darkness. In the process of cre-ation, Ialdabaoth followed the example of the Great Deitywho engendered the spiritual spheres. He produced out ofhis own being six planetary spirits, which he called his sons.Te spirits were all fashioned in his own image and were

reflections of each other, becoming progressively darker asthey receded from their father.

Here we have the Platonic theory of proximities, inwhich it is described that those beings which are closest tothe source of life, partake most of the source, but to thedegree that they retire from the source they partake of the

absence of the source, until at last the outer extremity of thereflections is mingled in the substance of the abyss.

Ialdabaoth and his six sons inhabit seven regions disposedlike a ladder. Tis ladder had its beginning under the middlespace (the region of their mother Sophia Achamoth) and itsend rests upon our earth, which is the seventh region. Whenthe earth is referred to as the seventh sphere it does not meanthe physical globe, but signifies rather the region of the earthcomposed of ether.

Ialdabaoth, as may be inferred from his origin, was nota pure spirit, for while he inherited from his mother (gen-erating wisdom) instinct and cunning, as well as an intui-tive realization of the universal immensity, he also received

from his father (matter) the qualities of ambition and pride,and these dominated his composition. With a sphere of plas-tic substances at his command Ialdabaoth severed himselffrom his mother and her sphere of intelligence, determiningto create a world according to his own desires in which he


35/177

33


should dwell as lord and master.

With the aid of his own sons, the six spirits of the plan-ets, the son of chaos created man, intending that the newcreature should reflect the fullness of the Demiurgic pow-ers. Tis man should acknowledge matter to be his lord andshould never seek beyond the material sphere for truth orlight. But Ialdabaoth failed utterly in his work. His manwas a monster, a vast soulless creature which crawled aboutthrough the ooze of the lower elements bearing witness tothe chaos that conceived it. Te six sons captured this mon-ster and brought the awful creature into the presence of theirfather, declaring that he must animate it and give it a soul ifit were to live.

Ialdabaoth was not a sufficiently exalted spirit and he

could not create life; all he could do was to make forms.In his extremity, the Demiurge bestowed upon the newcreature the ray of divine light which he himself had inher-ited from his mother Sophia Achamoth. It is thus that mangained the power of generative wisdom. Tis new man shar-ing the light with his own creator, now beheld himself as agod and refused to recognize Ialdabaoth as his master. Tus,Ialdabaoth was punished for his pride and self-sufficiency bybeing forced to sacrifice his own kingship in favor of a manhe had fashioned.

Sophia Achamoth now bestowed her favor on mankindeven at the expense of her own son. Humanity, which nowcontained her light, followed the impulse of that light and

began to collect of itself and into itself, and divide light fromthe darkness of matter. By virtue of this spiritual industry,mankind gradually transformed its own appearance until itno longer resembled its creator Ialdabaoth, but took on thevisage and manner of the supreme BeingAnthropos the


36/177

34


primal manwhose nature was of the substance of light

and whose disposition was of the substance of truth.When Ialdabaoth beheld his creation greater than him-

self, his anger blazed forth with jealous rage. His looksinspired by his passions were reflected downward into thegreat abyss as upon the polished surface of a mirror. Tisreflection apparently became inspired with life, for all bodiesare but ensouled shadows, and from the abyss, arose Satanin the form of a serpent, the embodiment of envy and cun-ning.

Realizing that mans power lay in the protection of hismother, Ialdabaoth determined to detach man from hisspiritual guardian, and for this reason, created about hima labyrinth of snares and delusions. In each sphere of the

world grew a tree of knowledge, but Ialdabaoth forbade manto eat of its fruit lest all the mysteries of the superior worldsbe revealed to him and the rulership of the son of chaoscome to an untimely end.

Sophia Achamoth, determined to protect the man whocontained her own soul, sent her genius Ophis in the form of

a serpent to induce man to transgress the selfish and unjustcommands of Ialdabaoth. Man, having eaten of the fruitof the tree, suddenly became capable of comprehending themysteries of creation.

Ialdabaoth revenged himself by punishing this first pair(Adam and Eve) for eating the heavenly fruit. He imprisonedman and woman in a dungeon of matter, building around

their spirits the physical bodies of chaotic elements whereinthe human being is still enthralled. But Sophia Achamothstill protected mankind. She established between her celes-tial region and relapsed mankind, a current of divine light,and kept supplying him constantly with a spiritual illumina-


37/177

35


tion through his own heart. Tus an internal light continu-

ally protected him even though his outer nature wanderedin the darkness.

Te battle continued, Sophia Achamoth, ever strivingto protect, and Ialdabaoth, ever determined to destroy. Atlast, sorely afflicted by the evils which had befallen her hu-man grandchildren, Sophia Achamoth was afraid that dark-ness would prevail against her. Ascending to the feet of hercelestial mother (the heavenly Sophia which is the wisdomof God), she besought the all-knowing to prevail upon theUnknown Depth (which is the Everlasting Father) to senddown into the underworld the Christos (who was the son ofthe union of the Father of Fathers and Heavenly Wisdom).Ialdabaoth and his six sons of matter were weaving a curious

web by which they were gradually, but inevitably, shuttingout the divine wisdom of the gods to the end that mankindshould perish in darkness. Te most difficult part in the sal-vation of man, lay in discovering the method by which theChristos could enter into the physical world. Tis methodmust be within the law of creation, for the gods cannot de-part from their own ways. o build bodies was not within

the province of the higher gods.Terefore, Ialdabaoth himself had to be coaxed into cre-

ating, without knowing the end, a body to receive the Soter.Sophia Achamoth appealed to the pride of the Demiurgeand finally prevailed upon Ialdabaoth to prove his powers bycreating a good and just man by the name of Jesus. When

this had been accomplished, the Soter Christos envelopedhimself in a cloak of invisibility and descended through thespheres of the seven archons. In each of the arches he as-sumed a body appropriate to the substances of the sphere,in this way concealing his true nature from the genii, or


38/177

36


guardians of the gates. In each world he called upon the

sparks of light to come out of the darkness and join him.Having united all the light of the worlds in his own nature,the Christos descended into the man Jesus at the baptism.Tis was the moment of the Age of the Great Miracle.

Ialdabaoth, having discovered that the Soter had de-scended incognito to thwart his purposes, stirred up thepeople against Jesus, and using all the forces of materialityat his command he succeeded in destroying the body bywhich the Christos was functioning in the material sphere.But before the Soter departed from the earth, he implantedin the souls of just men an understanding of the great mys-teries and opened forever the gate between the lower andhigher universes.

Teodoret thus completes the story: Tence, ascendinginto the middle space he (Christ) sits on the right hand ofIaldabaoth, but unperceived by him, and there collects allthe souls which shall have been purified by the knowledgeof Christ. When he has collected all the spiritual light thatexists in matter, out of Ialdabaoths empire, the redemptionwill be accomplished and the world will be destroyed. Such isthe meaning of the re-absorption of all the spiritual light intothe pleroma or fullness, whence it originally descended.

Gnostic Christianity conceived of salvation without ben-efit of exoteric clergy. Christ, the Soter, was the high priest,who by his descent destroyed forever the old order of theworld. Religion became a matter of internal adjustment.

Forms and rituals by which primitive peoples had propitiat-ed Ialdabaoth, were regarded as valueless under the dispensa-tion of the Christos. Te mystic sacraments of the Gnostics,on the other hand, were instituted by the Christos to facili-tate knowledge of the truth. Te rule of fear and darkness


39/177

37


was gone. Te rule of love and light had come. It appears,

however, that the Church regarded this new arrangementas economically unsound. Te Gnostics were destroyed, lesttheir philosophy render useless the temporal power of theChristian Church.

It was Basilides who claimed to have been a discipleof one of the twelve apostles who formulated the strangeconcept of Deity, which carried the name Abraxas. In theancient system of numerology, the number equivalent toAbraxas is 365. Terefore, this divinity represents the 365aeons or great spiritual cycles which together make up thenature of the Supreme Father. Te natural physical symbolfor the source of spiritual light is the visible sun, the sourceof physical light. Terefore Abraxas is a sun god. Te deity

itself is a composite creature with the head of a rooster, thebody of a human being, and with legs ending in serpents.Tis Gnostic pantheos represents the supreme principle ex-pressing five attributes or emanations. Te head of the roost-er signifies Phronesis, foresight or vigilance. Te two armsbearing the whip and shield are Dynamis and Sophia, powerand wisdom. Te two serpents forming the legs are Nous

and Logos, wisdom and understanding, by which the figureis supported. Te human body is a mystical intimation thatall these powers shall be revealed or perfected in man.

Although the early Church did everything possible toexterminate the Gnostics, cupidity played a part in the sur-vival of some holy relics. Te Gnostic hierophants identified

themselves by their signets or jewels of recognizance. Tesesignets were usually intaglios, plain on one side and with thefigure of Abraxas or the lion face of the sun on the other. Testones were set with the plain surface on the outside to makeidentification of the wearer more difficult.


40/177

38


Te gems were frequently engraved with Greek letters

around the central design. Tese letters represented magicwords, or the name of God. Te more commonly used stoneswere carnelian, crystal, bloodstone, and emerald matrix. TeChurch Fathers had no mind to destroy valuable property,so the rings were saved and also some other inscribed gemscontaining prayers or fragments of Gnostic philosophy andmagic. Te abraxoids, stones bearing the figure of Abraxas,

are exceedingly rare, but we are able to reproduce with thisarticle a fine example from the collection of our Society.Tere are small collections of these gems in the BibliothequeNationale in Paris and the Library of the Vatican at Rome.Gnostic intaglios date from the First, Second and TirdCenturies of the Christian era. Te abraxoids originatedin Northern Egypt, and the strongest seat of the EgyptianGnosis was the library city of Alexandria.

Te Gnostics were only one of several groups which at-tempted to reconcile pagan and Christian doctrines duringthe first five centuries. Tese groups insisted that there wasnothing essentially new in the Christian dispensation.

Te Syrian cult was merely a reformation of long existinginstitutions; a new interpretation of doctrines sanctified bythe veneration of countless nations and peoples of the past.In fact, even the Christians themselves, did not realize thatthey were the custodians of a unique revelation until thegrowing power of the Church forced this conclusion uponthem.

Early in this article we discussed the subject of emana-tions by which irreconcilable opposites appear to mingle inthe middle distances between extremes. Te Gnostic cult it-self, represented an effort to attain this condition of modera-tion by searching out the Christian elements in pagan phi-


41/177

39


losophy and the pagan elements in Christian philosophy.

Te Gnostics sought to bind the two great dispensationsof their time into a unified group dedicated to the perpetua-tion and dissemination of spiritual wisdom. Gnosticism wasa temperate zone between frigid paganism and torrid chur-chianity. But at that particular time, neither the pagans northe Christians had a mind for temperance. Te two greatinstitutions realized that they were locked in a battle to thedeath. Christianity was certainly the aggressor, and there isvery little evidence that paganism was essentially intolerant.After all, there were a hundred pagan institutions of spiri-tual and intellectual culture. Tese were not necessarily inmutual agreement, but they had dwelt together in compara-tive peace for thousands of years.

Te Romans summed up the situation rather well: Tecitizen may worship at any shrine or temple that pleases hisfancy. He may accept the cults of Egypt, favor the Magianreligion of Persia, or pay homage to the Greek divinities. Hemay worship in all temples or in none, but regardless of thedefinitions of his faith, he must pay his taxes.

Gnostic intaglios bearing the form of Abraxas are calledvariously abraxoids, abraxaster gems and abraxas gems.

According to Dr. J. Bellermann, the Egyptian Gnosticsof the first three centuries held the figure of Abraxas in highesteem. Tey used to symbolize both teacher and teachingas the subject and object of their transcendental researchesand mystical speculations. Te signets were tokens and pass-

symbols among the initiates of the fraternity, by which theyrecognized each other and gained admission to their assem-blies. Te abraxoid was also an amulet against evil, and atalisman of power. It further served the practical purpose ofa seal which could be affixed to documents.


42/177

40


Most abraxoids are crudely carved. Te cutting appearsto consist of a variety of notches and was done with a small,coarse wheel. Te materials were selected for their magicalproperties, and included jasper, chalcedony, fibrous hema-

tite, and other substances of no great value. Fine abraxoidsin crystal originated outside of the sect itself, and were usedby astrologers and magicians. Many Gnostic gems bear fig-ures of Greek or Egyptian divinities and magical inscrip-tions. Te form bearing only the rooster-headed deity is the

T G S GEnlarged three times the original size


43/177

41


most rare, and only a few examples are known to be in pri-

vate collectionPerhaps the pagans were temperate with a slight tendency

toward the chilly side. Teir religions were scientific, philo-sophic, and aesthetic. Tey discussed God reasonably ratherthan impulsively, and they approached the problem of livingas a serious business to be undertaken scientifically.

Tere is also the much discussed subject of pagan morals.In the long perspective of the ages there appears to be verylittle essential difference between ancient and modern de-linquency. Te old Greeks and Romans and their Egyptianand Chaldean cousins were pious in their pronouncementsand somewhat inadequate in the personal application oftheir impersonal convictions. As one writer expressed it: It

is a little difficult to distinguish clearly between Christianand pagan vice. All men, in all times, under all conditions,and in all places, have found it difficult to be virtuous in thepresence of intensive temptation.

It has been suggested that Christianity was a spontaneousemergence of personal nobility; a powerful revulsion against

the indescribable and utterly detestable private and publiccorruption of the pagan world. It seems to me that there isa hint of bias in this perspective. While the early Churchwas gathering its strength for mighty works, paganism alsowas producing examples of high-mindedness and finenessof character equal to anything that the Christian could ad-vance by way of comparison.

From the period 500 B.C. to 500 A.D., civilization re-ceived its priceless legacy of religious foundations, philo-sophical doctrines, scientific institutions, artistic and literarymonuments, and its enduring codes of laws, statutes, andregulations of human conduct. From medicine to astrono-


44/177

42


my, from architecture to poetry, from agriculture to ethics,

human talents and abilities were being wisely directed to-ward what Lord Bacon describes as reasonable ends. Dur-ing this period the modern concept of democracy unfolded,universal suffrage was advocated by the Roman Empire,and universal legitimacy was decreed. A Roman lady of theSecond Century had more legal standing than a modernwoman living in the State of New York in the 19th or early

20th Century. Politicians have always been a seedy lot, butRoman law was essentially sound and was enforced with areasonable degree of efficiency.

Most of the progress attained in the thousand years afore-mentioned was accomplished by pagan men and women.Hippocrates, the father of medicine, was a pagan. So like-

wise was Ptolemy, the father of geography. Te multiplica-tion table was given to us by a pagan, and the first Christianhymn was pagan music with new words. In the four centu-ries directly preceding the Christian era, the pagan worldproduced nearly six hundred immortal leaders of humanthought, human industry, and human achievement. With-out these men, modern civilization would not exist. How

many outstanding leaders of equal or approximate abil-ity were produced in the first four centuries of a Christiandominated Mediterranean civilization? We leave the readerto ponder this issue and discover, if he can, any such arrayof intellect outside of a circle of theological controversialistswhose contributions were completely sterile.

It is a little difficult to imagine that men of the caliber ofPlato, Euclid, Hippocrates, Cicero, Seneca, and Marcus Au-relius, could have been the products of a religious or moralcondition as corrupt as the Christian Fathers would have usbelieve. If like begets like, greatness must arise from great-


45/177

43


ness. Te wisdom of the individual reveals the essential wis-

dom of his time and place. Te contemporaries of Cato theElder may not all have shared the largeness of his mind, butthe materials necessary to create that largeness must havebeen available and readily accessible to such as were by na-ture inclined to largeness. Even in our own times, all men donot take advantage of the intellectual and spiritual opportu-nities which civilization offers, but it would be unkind and

unfair to deny the existence of truth and wisdom.We have no intention of belittling the essential principles

of the Christian dispensation, but we are inclined to agreewith Mohammed that the ante-Nicene Church Fathers wentto work systematically to organize a theological system, sonarrow and so ridden with intolerances, that Jesus himself

could not have been a member of his own church. Had Je-sus been born again in 350 A. D., he would have been pro-nounced a heretic and probably crucified a second time formerely repeating the words attributed to him in the Gos-pels.

Many enlightened pagans regarded the teachings of Jesuswith the highest veneration. Tey saw in him one of theirown kind, a noble and heroic man who had dedicated his lifeto the restatement of those noble principles and truths whichare indispensable to the perfection of human character. Veryfew pagans ever attacked the teachings of Jesus, but they didoppose the organization of those teachings into a sect obvi-ously dedicated to political anarchy. From the beginning,

the Christian Church was resolved to overthrow the paganworld and establish itself as both the spiritual and temporalautocrat of civilization. Tis brought the two systems to animpasse. Te struggle was no longer one for survival, but forcomplete and solitary domination.


46/177

44


Groups like the Gnostics attempted solution through rec-

onciliation. Tere was room in the world for more than onereligion, and spiritual institutions professing identical pur-poses should be able to cooperate without ulterior motive.Te pagan and Christian institutions should acknowledgetheir mutual interdependence and derive inspiration fromeach other.

Intellectual controversies have little effect upon the natu-ral processes of life. It is impossible to conceive of a Chris-tian or a pagan oak tree or a Christian or a pagan sunset.

Men of all faiths are born, live their lives, useful or uselessaccording to temperament, and having fulfilled their span,depart from the theater of this world in spite of belief orunbelief.

Te garden of the pagan farmer flourishes with propercare, and the garden of the Christian farmer is also green ifhe uses the same industry. Both gardens fail by neglect. Terain falls upon the just and the unjust, and belief or unbeliefadds nothing to the stature of the man or the contents ofhis barns. Te Christian stomach-ache is just as painful as

pagan dyspepsia, and the prayers of the infidels are answeredor unanswered exactly the same as the prayers of the mostorthodox bigot. Why then should we become so concernedabout what we believe? Te richness to ourselves lies in thefact that we believe.

Our personal acceptance is the reality of something su-preme and beautiful, noble and wise. It is necessary to our

personal security. Te Buddhist finds peace in the shrinesof his faith. Te Shinto is reassured inwardly by a pilgrim-age to a sacred mountain. Te Dervish finds God by danceand song. Each in his own way enjoys the benefit of spiritualconsolation. Tere is no evidence in nature as to which faith


47/177

45


has preferment. Religious controversies are peculiar to the

human intellectual equipment. Animals have no interest intheology but obey the laws of their kind, deriving instruc-tion from experience.

Religion is necessary to man, but competitive theologiesare neither necessary nor desirable. Religious prejudice, re-ligious intolerance, and religious fanaticism are psychoses.Tey are irrational fixations, which unbalance the reason,and if uncorrected, may lead to incurable mental disease.

Tere is a great deal of difference between a philosophicalsystem and a theological system. Most philosophers are bynature fitted for abstract thinking. Teir primary concernis to discover the universal plan as it operates through thesymbolism of creation. Tey have no desire to stamp this

plan with the signet of any creed, but through their contem-plation, they discover the grandeur of the world. Tis gran-deur itself becomes their spiritual code. Tey are satisfied toaccept the motion of universal principle moving accordingto absolute and unchanging law. Teir definition of virtueis derived through the observation of the operation of law,upon the substances of nature.

Philosophers may differ among themselves, but theirdifferences do not prevent them from mingling as humanbeings bound together by a common realization of mentalinadequacy and a redeeming sense of humor. Teir attitudescan be estimated by the adaptation of their requirements ofa familiar saying: I disapprove of what you say, but I will

defend to the death your right to say it.Teological systems are especially deficient in a sense of

humor. In fact, with most of them, happiness itself is a mildform of heresy. Religions approach the wonders of creationemotionally rather than mentally. Instead of accepting the


48/177

46


world as it is, the theologian is forever trying to inform the

world in the terms of what he feels the world should be. Phi-losophers and scientists are working toward conclusions, butmost religious leaders are working from conclusions.

Possibly the difficulty is that emotions are intensely per-sonal. Emotional reflexes arise from our own reactions to thethings that have happened to us. Our personal experiencesbecome the measuring stick by which we attempt to accli-mate universals. If we have suffered, suffering is the universalplan. If we have been unfairly treated, there is no justice inthe world. By investing the divine powers with personalitieslike our own, we create a pantheon of nervous, excitable, er-ratic, inconsistent, uncomfortable, frustrated, neurotic andinhibited divinities who run the world with the same lack of

ability with which we administer our own affairs.Te philosopher Pythagoras defined Deity as an infinite

being whose soul was formed of the substance of truth andwhose body was formed of the substance of light. Such adefinition arises from a deep, gentle contemplation of thebeautiful and the good.

How different is this conception of Deity, which is greatenough to sustain all life impersonally and impartially, fromthe God concept of theology. One brilliant theologian de-clared that the earth was divided into thirty parts. Te racesand nations inhabiting twenty-seven of these parts weredoomed to eternal perdition because they did not belong tohis church. Such a statement is so obviously unreasonable

that it has little favor in our more liberal times.Te concepts of God in theology have been worked over

considerably in the last century, but a number of absurd mis-conceptions still linger on to plague the private citizen andfrustrate the United Nations program. While the majority


49/177

47


of moderns are inclined to allow various races to worship

as they please, this emotion arises from indifference ratherthan an enlightened liberalism. We have not yet reached thedegree of maturity by which we may perceive as a fact thatreligious systems are simply human efforts to interpret a di-vine mystery. It is the mystery and not the interpretationthat is real. If we are a normal, healthy, growing people, ourinterpretations must and should grow and change. We are

not heretics because we change our minds. We are not un-true to God because we discard old forms of belief. Te endof religion is the internal knowledge of the divine power.Tis knowledge brings with it a greater measure of venera-tion and love and a firmer desire to live according to thebeauty of the divine plan. Names and sects and creeds areimportant only while the nature of truth itself is unattained.When we understand the principle, we become tolerant ofthat variety of forms which men have built in the name ofthe Nameless.

Te Gnostics sought to find the esoteric tradition of themystery schools in the Christian revelation. Tey told thestory, amplified it, enriched its emblems and figures and ac-

cepted the Christian Christ as a form of the Eternal Heroof the World. o them Christ was Dionysus, Osiris, Adonis,and even Buddha. Being a philosophical sect, they wereseeking the universals of the new faith.

Tey had no interest in an ecclesiastical system, for theyrealized that no man can be saved by addicting himself to a

theology. Te value lay in the soul experience. If Christianitycould bestow a new dimension upon the internal convictionof realities, then Christianity was important. Tis impor-tance deserved the respect and admiration of all thoughtfuland sincere men. Te new sect was valuable for those things


50/177

48


in it, which were eternal. As an innovation it was worthless.

It must justify its existence by proving that it participated inthe esoteric tradition of the ages.

All the philosophical schools made use of the symbolismof a soter or high priest of the inner mystery of salvation. Itwas evident that in the Christian sect Christ was this soter.It was a philosophic belief that the universe was created bythe wisdom of God. Tis wisdom was revealed through themagnificent framework of laws, which maintain the orderof the cosmos.

In the Gnostic system, wisdom was the second Logoswhich came forth out of the eternal will which is the firstLogos. Will emanates wisdom, and wisdom in turn, engen-ders action of the active principle. Action is the third Logos

called the Holy Ghost, represented by a dove beating the airwith its wings.

Te word ghost is fromgeistand in its original form theterm signified a breath or motion of air. Our word gust asapplied to an agitation of the atmosphere, comes from thesame root. Te Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit, is the mover of

the substance of the material creation. Tus we have a basictrinity of will, wisdom and activity.

In the Gnostic philosophy special emphasis is placedupon the principle of wisdom, which is regarded as the Uni-versal Savior, and the mediator between cause and effect.Te nature of wisdom itself is a profound mystery imply-ing far more than our present definition of the word. Te

wisdom principle is a compound consisting of two qualitiesbound together by an internal sympathy. It is the first exten-sion of unity toward diversity, and at the same time, it is theleast degree of that diversity.

It is a mistake to regard wisdom in the terms of the Gnosis


51/177

49


as originating from intellect or in itself intellectual. Wisdom

is not of the order of thinking; it is of the order of knowing.Knowledge is possible only through the establishment of anintense sympathy between the thing knowing and the thingknown. Te subject and the object must be bound into anintimate compound by an experienced consciousness. Wis-dom, therefore, is a kind of artificial unity made possible bythe power of the will. Like the philosophers stone described

by the alchemists as the man-made diamond, wisdom is asynthetic essential substance perfected by art.

Te knowledge aspect of wisdom is philosophy; it is thepower to perceive the divine nature, the divine will, and thedivine purpose in all structures, substances, and processesof nature. rue philosophy is an experience of consciousness

toward the discovery of truth.Te love aspect of wisdom, the Sophia of the Gnosis, is

natural religion or faith. Wisdom is experienced as an emo-tional impact. Te universal realities are felt and estimatedin terms of the feelings which they stimulate within the per-sonality. Te wisdom-love apperceptive power, if exercisedas the instrument to attain the state of knowledge, results inthe perfect experience of God and nature.

As is usual with philosophical groups, the Gnostics wereindividualists and opposed to any intense program of orga-nization. Te sect consisted of numerous small groups eachdominated by one or more intellectuals with strong personalconvictions. Gnosticism was many schools enclosed within

a loose program of integration with few restrictions uponthe convictions and tastes of the members. Circles of Gnos-tic thought sprang up in most of the countries borderingupon the Mediterranean. Each of these circles contributedoriginal ideas to the larger pattern of Gnostic thought. Tese


52/177

50


groups of original thinkers were influenced by the religious

and philosophic systems which flourished in their environ-ment. Te Gnosis was a purpose rather than a cult. It wassearching for itself in all structures of ideas which appearedstrange or different.

For lack of organization the Gnostics presented no unitedfront, and lacked the machinery to rally their forces againstany common enemy. At that time the rising ChristianChurch was the enemy of all pagan movements. It had theadvantage of recognizing the importancefrom a tempo-ral standpoint at leastof building a solid, internal mecha-nism. Te isolated communities were drawn together underunified ecclesiastic authority. As a result of this premeditatedprogram, the Church was in a position to impose its will,

by force if necessary, upon the scattered and unorganizedpagan schools.

Gnosticism spread by a process of free growth. It unfold-ed like a plant, extending according to impulse and with nodogmatic concepts. It was, therefore, extremely liberal andby constitution, non-militant. It suffered from the uncer-tainties natural to extreme liberalism.

Te Gnostics have been held responsible for the rapiddevelopment of the temporal authority of the ChristianChurch. Te ante-Nicene Fathers united their resources tostamp out Gnosticism. Had they failed, the Church woulditself have ceased so far as political authority was concerned.Te early bishops learned the important lesson that a reli-

gion must be organized in order to survive as a temporalinstitution. Tey learned their lessons so well that organiza-tion has been a primary consideration from their time to thepresent day.

It may be reasonably asked if the Church had any real


53/177

51


justification for its program of exterminating the Gnostics.

From a broad impersonal viewpoint, the action of the Fa-thers cannot be condoned, but according to their own con-victions and beliefs, their actions are quite understandable.Te Gnostics accepted the Christian concepts of Christ intotheir own system, and interpreted the Christian mysteryby means of their elaborate system of heterdox mythology.Teir Christology took on the splendor of Asiatic legendary

and was involved in elaborate metaphysical imagination.Te Church Fathers felt that heathen philosophers lit-

e

manly p hall - wisdom of the knowing ones [1 ebook - pdf]

Documents