Thank you for this painless essay on Gnosticism. I once had the goal of studying every religion, to fine one that suited me best. A friend directed me to Gnosticism. Sadly, it was like me watching golf on TV. My eyes rolled up into my head (there is Sooo much Graaaaaasssss) Zzzzzzzz. So, NOt for me, however, it is good to know kinda how your wanna be overlord thinks. The idea that i, might be tabla rasa is absurd in the extreme. I cannot fathom how anyone falls for that.
Perhaps you can provide some greater insight then. The various esoteric religions that have popped up over the centuries were founded by mystics who didn't understand the source material they borrowed from, and I'm just getting started with tracing their origins.
I can't pretend to be an expert, but i can give it a shot! I can only speak for Lurianic Kabbalah, not sure how Adam Kadmon is explained by other traditions.
Adam Kadmon (A.K.) is a anthropomorphic representation of the psyche of the world. Each sephira is a different element of the psyche (love, fear, desire, etc)
Kabbalah/Jewish mysticism is panantheistic. The Torah allows G-d's transcendent form to be described anthropomorphically because man is created in His image (as you quoted). (Otherwise logically there is no way to describe the unknowable)
Adam Kadmon is the primordial essence of each of the aspects of human psyche, in abstract form, maybe similar to platonism.
In the four worlds (or stages) of creation, A.K. represents the highest, or Atzilut, lit. "emanation" in which there is no form yet, only potential. Creation of form happens as Divine energy "flows" through each world, from the G-dhead/Essence, which is absolutely undifferentiated, through pure potential (emanation), then the 3 worlds of first spiritual matter (Beriah, lit. creation, where the aspects of A.K. gain actual definition), then Yetzirah (lit. formation) where the spiritual worlds exist (in Kabbalah, the world of angels and ideas) and then our world of Assiyah, (lit. "action"), corporeal and scientifically observable.
I understood you used it to mean "ideal man", in the Marxist sense, which is actually a foreign concept to Judaism and Kabbalah generally. In fact, images that show the sephirot in the style of the Vitrivian Man as you have posted are proscribed by Judaism. The rationale being that iconography leads to misunderstanding...
Tremendously insightful! To be perfectly honest though, I'm not at all surprised to find out that image is blasphemous, and should I ever re-visit this topic, I'll be sure to point that out to my readers. A lot of the ancient wisdom, regardless of where it comes from, has been bastardised by people who either don't understand it, have malevolent intentions, or both.
Are you talking about socialists? (I’ve been reading your post & your blog as well all day! There’s a lot going on here, so I hate to ask a silly question.)
While you are welcome to your own perspective, your categorization of GOD as unknowable has never truly been the case. If it was, then the qualities referenced by such conditions as the return simply could not exist.
Religion per se, is a fact of abrahamism itself, whereby religion develops its own unique sociopolitical, and some say economic activity. Before the advent of the abrahamics, what we call the religious experience was an intrinsic feature of the parent culture. For example, there was no name for worship amongst Europeans until the advent of Christianity dubbed them Pagans.
It is also a gross misrepresentation to reduce the three natures of man; Pneumatic, Psychic, Hyllic to some type of exploitation strategy. The understanding of these natures was lampooned by Irenaeus, a self confessed simpleton whose attempt to rebut the Valentinians is seen as sober and correct, despite his constant admission that he couldn't understand their explanations. Human nature is a wonderful thing, but just as everyone won't become carpenters, so those who will take up the mystical path are a certain type of person.
Importantly, the persistent claim that Gnosticism is a Christian heresy is utterly unfounded and based upon a series of cemented in predjudices seasoned with traditional abrahamic hubris, neither of which can claim any historical legitimacy.
Gnosticism is not, nor ever has been such and such, or so and so because Gnosticism is first person individual mystical experience that is verifiable through the walking of that path. Condemning Gnosticism with no understanding of this fact is an age old and rather puerile tactic.
Yes, I do realize that bashing Gnosticism is fashionable today to the point of becoming trite. However, it is neither accurate or intellectually sound to base opinion upon erroneous historical assumptions and pat structural examinations that lack all context and sensibility.
Yes, a lot of Jews are like that. They give the rest a bad name, and there are plenty of Jews who leave the faith because they don't want to be that way, and are more interested in getting along with others than adhering to their religion. Furthermore, I won't deny that a lot of the key power players (banksters, academics, media moguls, etc.) are Jews. However, those are not the majority.
There's also the matter that the gnostics have also infiltrated other movements. A lot of fundamentalist Christian churches (Jehovah's Witnesses in particular) resemble gnostic cults to my eyes. Granted, Christianity is a derivative of Judaism, and for that reason the National Socialist Germans considered it to be a "Jewish plot" to subjugate the German people. That's a rabbit hole for another day, and I'll definitely tackle that subject and how it bastardised Nordic Paganism in the process.
Except that it's only the original Gnostics (capitalisation is important here) that rejected the God of Abraham, and they were wiped out by the Roman Catholic Church, but other incarnations of the doctrine lived on, attaching themselves to some bastardised version of Christianity (e.g. Freemasonry) or rejecting the classical religions altogether (e.g. Marxism).
Also, pretty sure "dhimmi" is an Islamic term, not a Hebrew one.
Dhimmi and noahides are interchangeable. In the same way, the mitzvahs and sharia are extremely similar. Dhimmi is known but Noahide is not.
The goal is to convert the world to worship of Yahweh but without any of the perks reserved for his chosen ethnic tribe.
Christianity is almost Noahide compliant because it converted gentiles to worship of the Jewish entity and the acknowledgement that they are the chosen people. However there is the problem of the Trinity and the icons and local saint traditions which are pagan additions that they want eliminated.
Protestantism in contrast is, like Islam, Noahide compliant.
You don’t seem very knowledgeable about the topic of occult schemes and Hebrew subversion. I’d learn about what Noahidism is before commenting on early gnostics, who rejected the protocols of the learned rabbis. Unlike Christians, who worship the Yahweh demon.
Not yet. There's a book on Hegel's Hermeticism that goes into great detail about Böhme's influence, which is currently on my reading list. I'll definitely cover in him in a later article, I just don't know when.
Thank you for this painless essay on Gnosticism. I once had the goal of studying every religion, to fine one that suited me best. A friend directed me to Gnosticism. Sadly, it was like me watching golf on TV. My eyes rolled up into my head (there is Sooo much Graaaaaasssss) Zzzzzzzz. So, NOt for me, however, it is good to know kinda how your wanna be overlord thinks. The idea that i, might be tabla rasa is absurd in the extreme. I cannot fathom how anyone falls for that.
As a student of Kabbalah I didn’t really understand your reference to Adam Kadmon, but enjoyed the essay
Perhaps you can provide some greater insight then. The various esoteric religions that have popped up over the centuries were founded by mystics who didn't understand the source material they borrowed from, and I'm just getting started with tracing their origins.
I can't pretend to be an expert, but i can give it a shot! I can only speak for Lurianic Kabbalah, not sure how Adam Kadmon is explained by other traditions.
Adam Kadmon (A.K.) is a anthropomorphic representation of the psyche of the world. Each sephira is a different element of the psyche (love, fear, desire, etc)
Kabbalah/Jewish mysticism is panantheistic. The Torah allows G-d's transcendent form to be described anthropomorphically because man is created in His image (as you quoted). (Otherwise logically there is no way to describe the unknowable)
Adam Kadmon is the primordial essence of each of the aspects of human psyche, in abstract form, maybe similar to platonism.
In the four worlds (or stages) of creation, A.K. represents the highest, or Atzilut, lit. "emanation" in which there is no form yet, only potential. Creation of form happens as Divine energy "flows" through each world, from the G-dhead/Essence, which is absolutely undifferentiated, through pure potential (emanation), then the 3 worlds of first spiritual matter (Beriah, lit. creation, where the aspects of A.K. gain actual definition), then Yetzirah (lit. formation) where the spiritual worlds exist (in Kabbalah, the world of angels and ideas) and then our world of Assiyah, (lit. "action"), corporeal and scientifically observable.
I understood you used it to mean "ideal man", in the Marxist sense, which is actually a foreign concept to Judaism and Kabbalah generally. In fact, images that show the sephirot in the style of the Vitrivian Man as you have posted are proscribed by Judaism. The rationale being that iconography leads to misunderstanding...
Tremendously insightful! To be perfectly honest though, I'm not at all surprised to find out that image is blasphemous, and should I ever re-visit this topic, I'll be sure to point that out to my readers. A lot of the ancient wisdom, regardless of where it comes from, has been bastardised by people who either don't understand it, have malevolent intentions, or both.
James Lindsay discusses at length on his podcast the Hermeticism of Hegel and the gnosticism of Marx and those who descend from him.
I know. He's one of my sources.
Are you talking about socialists? (I’ve been reading your post & your blog as well all day! There’s a lot going on here, so I hate to ask a silly question.)
While you are welcome to your own perspective, your categorization of GOD as unknowable has never truly been the case. If it was, then the qualities referenced by such conditions as the return simply could not exist.
Religion per se, is a fact of abrahamism itself, whereby religion develops its own unique sociopolitical, and some say economic activity. Before the advent of the abrahamics, what we call the religious experience was an intrinsic feature of the parent culture. For example, there was no name for worship amongst Europeans until the advent of Christianity dubbed them Pagans.
It is also a gross misrepresentation to reduce the three natures of man; Pneumatic, Psychic, Hyllic to some type of exploitation strategy. The understanding of these natures was lampooned by Irenaeus, a self confessed simpleton whose attempt to rebut the Valentinians is seen as sober and correct, despite his constant admission that he couldn't understand their explanations. Human nature is a wonderful thing, but just as everyone won't become carpenters, so those who will take up the mystical path are a certain type of person.
Importantly, the persistent claim that Gnosticism is a Christian heresy is utterly unfounded and based upon a series of cemented in predjudices seasoned with traditional abrahamic hubris, neither of which can claim any historical legitimacy.
Gnosticism is not, nor ever has been such and such, or so and so because Gnosticism is first person individual mystical experience that is verifiable through the walking of that path. Condemning Gnosticism with no understanding of this fact is an age old and rather puerile tactic.
Yes, I do realize that bashing Gnosticism is fashionable today to the point of becoming trite. However, it is neither accurate or intellectually sound to base opinion upon erroneous historical assumptions and pat structural examinations that lack all context and sensibility.
Woo Hoo
>The most concise way to define Gnosticism is that it is the belief that a certain group of people are "the chosen followers of the One True God."
That's Judaism, actually.
The people who are blaming the current state of the world on gnostics are running cover for the Jews.
Yes, a lot of Jews are like that. They give the rest a bad name, and there are plenty of Jews who leave the faith because they don't want to be that way, and are more interested in getting along with others than adhering to their religion. Furthermore, I won't deny that a lot of the key power players (banksters, academics, media moguls, etc.) are Jews. However, those are not the majority.
There's also the matter that the gnostics have also infiltrated other movements. A lot of fundamentalist Christian churches (Jehovah's Witnesses in particular) resemble gnostic cults to my eyes. Granted, Christianity is a derivative of Judaism, and for that reason the National Socialist Germans considered it to be a "Jewish plot" to subjugate the German people. That's a rabbit hole for another day, and I'll definitely tackle that subject and how it bastardised Nordic Paganism in the process.
Their religion literally states that they, Yahwehs Chosen will enslave the entire world and make everyone Noahide compliant dhimmi.
It’s in your holy book.
The absolute chutzpah to accuse gnostics who reject the supremacist Old Testament text of being what you yourself are is well, simply breathtaking.
Except that it's only the original Gnostics (capitalisation is important here) that rejected the God of Abraham, and they were wiped out by the Roman Catholic Church, but other incarnations of the doctrine lived on, attaching themselves to some bastardised version of Christianity (e.g. Freemasonry) or rejecting the classical religions altogether (e.g. Marxism).
Also, pretty sure "dhimmi" is an Islamic term, not a Hebrew one.
Dhimmi and noahides are interchangeable. In the same way, the mitzvahs and sharia are extremely similar. Dhimmi is known but Noahide is not.
The goal is to convert the world to worship of Yahweh but without any of the perks reserved for his chosen ethnic tribe.
Christianity is almost Noahide compliant because it converted gentiles to worship of the Jewish entity and the acknowledgement that they are the chosen people. However there is the problem of the Trinity and the icons and local saint traditions which are pagan additions that they want eliminated.
Protestantism in contrast is, like Islam, Noahide compliant.
You don’t seem very knowledgeable about the topic of occult schemes and Hebrew subversion. I’d learn about what Noahidism is before commenting on early gnostics, who rejected the protocols of the learned rabbis. Unlike Christians, who worship the Yahweh demon.
Boom
Communism is the economic system for a New Testament based society. You will own nothing and be blessed (in heaven).
Capitalism is for an Old Testament based society. Yahweh is a loan shark in the Torah.
The ideal is for the elite to be OT and the masses to be NT. This agenda is called Noahidism and is found in the Bible and expanded on in the Talmud.
If you say so
Not yet. There's a book on Hegel's Hermeticism that goes into great detail about Böhme's influence, which is currently on my reading list. I'll definitely cover in him in a later article, I just don't know when.