Nuvoadam
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2003 5:37 am Post subject: Gnostic Priority and Authority |
 |
|
This is a repost of some information I supplied recently.
I thought it might stand on its own as a thread others
might wish to add to concerning Gnostic priorty and
authority. If one digs through the Gnostic texts they
will find hints of prior texts which the w.Gnostics are
leaning upon to give their own platforms more authority.
This priority of these previous texts, some of which
remain undiscovered, may be indicative of how the
w.Gnostics came about their ideas, and why, and where.
Many if not all of the apocryphal books were penned by
Gnostic-minded people living over a century after Jesus'
era. The Ascension of Isaiah for example.
The pseudepigraphal works were mainly penned starting
around 200 BCE to 200 CE. The Books of Enoch are a good
pseudepigraphal example of Gnostic-al writings.
There is no such thing as a writing which is "fully gnostic
in nature", because the definiton of what "Gnostic" is has
ever been up for debate, even by those few groups we know
to have used the name for themselves, and the handful of
others we believe used the name because they are accused
of such by their Church attackers.
To explain the critical point-- what is the "nature" of a
Gnostic writing? According to some, they would be
'characterised' by a belief in a big bad evil Demiurge.
According to others, the true *nature of Gnostic writings
would be found in the simple recognition that this world is
dualistic, or Maya-illusive, and that rather than faith, it
is only absolute knowledge which will bring us the
emancipation of Gnostic salvation. There were centers of
Gnostical thought, often in direct and bitter competition
with each other for the enquiring minds.
If one is going to step back and squint their eyes, then
yes, Gnosticism is a *tree, and yes, it had what can
loosely be called *roots. But Western Gnosticism never
was its own entity. That's why there was never an orthodox
definition of Gnosticism beyond the agreement that duality
and self-suffering could only be ended through
Knowledge-of-self and not through Faith-in-other.
Some will be looking for the first documents depicting a
evil-bad Creator figure. Others will be looking for the
first Gnostic-type documents depicting a dualistic
Maya-world and thereafter suggesting something to be done
about it which will lead to self-discovery. Two very
different ideas of what Gnostic "nature" really means.
I suggest anyone pick up "The Other Bible", edited by
Willis Barnstone. It is a solid source of Jewish
pseudepigrapha, Christian apocrypha, Gnostic scriptures,
Kabbalah and the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Be mindful of what Gnostic texts use for their own
authority. "On the Origin of the World" refers to some
undiscovered older source documents such as "The First
Logos of Noraia", probably also "The First Book of Noraia".
Also it refers to "The Book of Solomon", probably one of
the pseudepigraphal Solomon works by Philo of Alexandria,
some of which were composed just before Jesus was born.
Also "The Schemata of the Heimarmene of the Heaven Which
is Beneath the Twelve", and then there is "The Seventh
Cosmos of Hieralaias the Prophet".
"The Hypostasis of the Archons" quotes Paul in Eph. 6.12,
but this doesn't mean that it was a work contemporary to
Paul's era. This being said, I have seen at least one
exploration that this work could be attributed to Paul or
even to his master Gamaliel. In a round-about way, the
Gnostic work called the Pistis-Sophia (Faith-Knowledge)
is mentioned. The Sophia works are sometimes thought to
be of Valentinian origin.
"The Apocalypse of Adam" is an example of a newer work
which has a distinctly older feel to it. It can only be
termed a *Sethian tractate* in the sense that it was
supposedly first compiled by Adam's son Seth (in Adams
"seven-hundredth year") as a warning about the Elohim
(Gnostic Archons). I would look closely into this kind
of Gnostical tractate. This is the same kind of mythos
that Gamaliel, Paul and especially Dositheus were tapping
into in order to repackage it as a purely Gnostical work.
"The Apocaplypse of Adam" may be grouped together with
"Zostrianos", "The Gospel of the Egyptians", "Allogenes",
and "Marsanes" in works generally called Sethian. Also
we may add the "Epistle of Eugnostos", "The Sophia of
Jesus" and "The Book of Norea" to this group. These
documents seem to use stories like the "Vitae of Adam
and Eve" as the foundation for their authority. They tap
into the Greek story of Tatarus (also Tartarus), whom was
the father of Typhon, also called as the Egyptian Seth,
whose royal throne name was Set-hen (House of Seth) aka
Satan.
In a text we loosely call "The Three Steles of Seth", the
revelation is attributed to Dositheos. This would be one
of the earliest Western Gnostical texts if this is true.
The "Three Stele" are mythological stone markers scribed
by Adam's son himself and left on a mountaintop to survive
the flood. Dositheus claims to have found them but does not
tell us where. Apparently his information has been challenged
because we look to Dositheus' opening statements and find the
excuse for his authority included in the prelude: "he
(Dositheos) saw and understood. And after he had read
them, he remembered them. And he gave them to the elect,
just as they are inscribed there."
I suggest picking up a book called "The Nag Hammadi
Library", edited by James Robinson. This contains his
short elucidations on each work in the Nag Hammadi, and
reveals that they are mostly Valentinian and Neoplatonist,
suggesting a much later date for the libraries creation
and burial than many of us wanted to accept at first.
Also, in "The Secret Book of John" for instance we find
the Sethian works attributed to Dositheos mentioned with
the name "Pigeradamas", who appoints his son Seth over a
eternal realm. Here are the biblical Adam and his son Seth
turned into mythological figures. In "The Second Treatise
of the Great Seth" Adam as Pigeradamas is shortened to
"Geradamas" and Seth is called "Emmacha Seth".
In the middle of this Nag Hammadi work in the name of
John, we are presented with a long list of angel-names
which is very Zoroastrian. As in the Alexandrian
Valentinianism, the number 365 is present as a total for
the number of Archon-Angels who each contribute some part
of their genetic material to the creation of man. And
then, right when we are suspicius of syncretism of an epic
order, pseudo-John sources his authority: "There are other
angels over the remaining passions, and I have not told you
about them. If you want to know about them, the information
is recorded in the Book of Zoroaster."
If one is looking for the oldest works which may be called
both WESTERN Gnostic-in-type and WESTERN Gnostic-in-subject,
then one is looking for Philo and Simon Magus. The work
"The Great Declaration"(Apophasis megale) was ascribed to
Simon, and the "Pseudo-Clementines" also present his teaching
in detail.
If one is looking for the oldest documents which may be
called both Gnostic-in-type and Gnostic-in-subject in the
sense that they address a dualistic self-suffering alongside
suggested techniques to do Transcend Matter, then one is
looking for the Hindu Veda's, early Buddhist works, the Tao
te Ching, and other Eastern Gnostical works. Lao tzu once
claimed to have seen early Shang Dynasty documents concerning
The Way, which he taught to others. This was all around
600 - 500 BC, a time when the east records as the era of a
thousand Schools-- a period of enlightenment which had a
counterpart in Greece, among other places.
As a lead in to the interaction of Western and Eastern
Gnosticism, here is a link to some post wherein I document
some of the contacts of Buddhism with Greece. The Essenes
claim to be a western branch of Buddhism, and Josephus
states that they were around for "thousands of years" before
his era.
http://tinyurl.com/ofia |
|
