Re: what is an "Anti-Cosmic Dualism?" (Hermes)
- Sorry all, been gone. Just thought I would throw something in on
Even long after it was demonstrated that the Corpus Hermetica came
from the same era as Gnosticism (with the oldest physical evidence
being mixed in with the Gnostic texts in the Nag Hammadi), many
believed that the so called "Emerald Tablet" was till a throwback to
an earlier form. Most scholors now disregard this, and although many
occult practitioners feel it is very old, there really is no reason
to think so. There are inscriptions that predate Jesus, but they
don't seem to relate to a full blown philosophical or religious
I'll post the Emerald Tablet in full here, and I think that anyone
here who has read the Nag Hammadi texts, both Gnostic and Hermetic,
can see it fits right in this line of thinking.
0) When I entered into the cave, I received the tablet zaradi, which
was inscribed, from between the hands of Hermes, in which I
discovered these words:
1) True, without falsehood, certain, most certain.
2) What is above is like what is below, and what is below is like
that which is above. To make the miracle of the one thing.
3) And as all things were made from contemplation of one, so all
things were born from one adaptation.
4) Its father is the Sun, its mother is the Moon.
5) The wind carried it in its womb, the earth breast fed it.
6) It is the father of all `works of wonder' (Telesmi) in the world.
6a) Its power is complete (integra).
7) If cast to (turned towards- versa fuerit) earth,
7a) it will separate earth from fire, the subtile from the gross.
8) With great capacity it ascends from earth to heaven. Again it
descends to earth, and takes back the power of the above and the
9) Thus you will receive the glory of the distinctiveness of the
world. All obscurity will flee from you.
10) This is the whole most strong strength of all strength, for it
overcomes all subtle things, and penetrates all solid things.
11a) Thus was the world created.
12) From this comes marvelous adaptions of which this is the
13) Therefore I am called Hermes, because I have three parts of the
wisdom of the whole world.
14) And complete is what I had to say about the work of the Sun,
from the book of Galieni Alfachimi.
[From Latin in Steele and Singer 1928: 492.]
You can see the Platonic Elements in this, as well as Platonic
emenationism and the tripartite human. Being a form of Platonism,
Hermeticism obviously can't predate Plato.
We should also maybe point out that Classical Hermeticism is
generally now called "Hermetism" to destinguish it from the later
alchemical "Hermeticism". Some scholors, like Dr Pearson, believe
that Hermetism is actually an outgrowth from Gnosticism, and have
pointed out where Hermetic texts seem dependant on specific Jewish
and Christian texts with Platonic influences.
Whatever the relationship between the two groups, it seems pretty
clear that they did interact and were closely related. Which ever
one technically came first, it does not look as though it would have
been by long.
--- In email@example.com, "Steve" <eugnostos2000@y...>
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Tsharpmin7@a... wrote:suggesting
> > hello Steve, tell me more. was the Corpus Hermeticum considered
> > beginning of Hermetic method or just the earliest recognized
> text? i can't tell
> > you why but i seem to have been under the impression Hermeticism
> had an
> > approximately 3rd century BCE. origin. you seem to be
> a beginningbelieve
> > roughly concurrent with Christian Gnosticism. i'm pleading
> ignorance here, so help
> > me out.
> > thanks,
> > Crispin Sainte III
> Hi Crispin. Some of the Hermetic works were translated in Italy
> during the Renaissance and the idea that the texts were of ancient
> Egyptian origin was popularized. However, most scholars today
> that they were written in Alexandria between the 1st and 3rdhypothetically
> centuries A.D. So yes, although they may be based on
> ealier tradition, the documents themselves were produced at aboutthe
> same time as Christian Gnostic works. -Steve W.
- Hello pmcvflag
On 10/02/05, you wrote:
> Hey Mike
>>>> Wasn't the emerald tablet known before the Renisance rediscovery
> the Hermetic texts, and cited by earlier Alchemists? If so, that
> could lead to the idea it was more ancient. The Sephir Yedzirah was
> out there long before the Zohar, for instance.<<<
> If I recall, the oldest version of the "Emerald Tablet" is from
> around the 800s (AD), in Arabic. I think there were translations
> from the 1200s in medieval Europe, and certainly there have been
> people who thought these texts were very old. I am not sure exactly
> where the discovery era presents any genuine reasoning for an older
> date for the text, but of course even though the notion is not
> relavant in modern thinking it could have been part of the reasoning
> for people at the time. I can't say for sure. However, if you think
> about it from the Renaissance rational, Hermes was a real person
> from the time of Moses, which means that all hermetic writings that
> were valid came from this historical person. So even then some texts
> would not have predated the others.
> It is true, the Sefer Yetzirah predates the Zohar.... but it is also
> from a different tradition than the Zohar. So, this could be more
> like comparing pre-Hermetic ideas of "Hermes" with those of the
> Corpus Hermetica. Yes, they predate them, but they also tell us a
> limited amount about them.
> So, you could have a point there... the mere fact that the texts
> were more popular and known before the Corpus Hermetica were
> rediscovered could have lead some thinkers to the idea that they
> were older. However, I am not sure exactly where this thinking would
> have come from... all things considered.
Actuallly literal acceptance of authorship and age was quite common.
Mike Leavitt ac998_@_lafn._org remove -'s