BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Gnosticism's Ialdaboath/Yaweh vs. Hermeticism's YHVH

 
 
NoFixedAbode
19:20 / 06.11.06
I'm just getting into alternate views of reality (been reading the more serious magical texts - Dione Fortune, Crowley, as well as some chaos magic texts), and have discovered what appears to be a fundamental difference between Gnosticism and Hermeticism (at least the Hermeticism practiced by the GD).

The Gnostics believe that this material world was created by an insane god called Ialdoboath - who, as it turns out is the same god worshipped in the old testament, our friend Jehovah, or YHVH. Needless to say, YHVH appears quite prominantly in GD theory and practice. In the LBRP, he's the first god form invoked.

So what's the story here - are the Gnostics and GD/Hermeticists at odds? Are the GD rituals an invocation of this Jehovah guy, or something of an acknowledgement of his dominion on this plane (while still believing he's an evil nut-case?)

NoFixedAbode
 
 
Unconditional Love
20:29 / 06.11.06
Read through the descriptions on this page Demiurge, they may well help you decide on how to approach that area, or they may just illustrate how gnosticism, neo platonism and the developement of hermeticism are interwoven, but ancient as well as modern opinions differ as to wether the demiurge is the same guy or good or evil, the more ive read of creation myths the more this whole area becomes a mindfield.
 
 
Digital Hermes
21:00 / 06.11.06
That is a very good question, something I've been grappling with as I begin to follow a more gnostic path.

I can't really answer, but I can speculate. Could some of the more hermetical perspectives be focusing on trafficking with those that do control and enforce this world? 'Trafficking with daemons", as they say? The question might be on how the GD and Hermetical traditions treat those entities that they interact with. Do we worship, or do we negotiate/parlay with them?

I'm still too much the neophyte to answer properly.
 
 
trouser the trouserian
11:02 / 07.11.06
It's certainly an interesting question. There is a lot of - at core - judeo-christian symbolism and thematic structures appearing in Golden Dawn teachings because as much as the GD produced a syncretic fusion of Egyptian, Hermetic & Neoplatonic themes (amongst others) this was largely done within a Christian context - albeit an esoteric Christianity. Both Westcott & Mathers, for example, were greatly influenced by the Esoteric Christian doctrines expounded by Dr. Anna Kingsford & Edward Maitland (Mathers dedicates The Kabbalah Unveiled to them). Kingsford rejected both biblical literalism and antonement doctrine, and asserted that Christianity’s roots lay in the wisdom of the Hermetic and pagan schools but that this had been obscured over the centuries. She taught that the biblical story of Jesus was not the history of one man – albeit the son of God – but an allegory of the quest for spiritual growth of each human being.

It would also be interesting to look at the influence of Gnostic ideas within the 19th-century occult revival in general. An edition of the Pistis Sophia was produced in 1896 by Theosophist George Mead and Charles King's influential work The Gnostics and their remains is mentioned both by Blavatsky and Hargrave Jennings. Jocelyn Godwin, in his The Theosophical Enlightenment notes that Theosophy can be viewed as a "neo-gnostic" movement and Mead's popular presentation of gnostic beliefs - through a theosophical lens - are thought by some scholars to have influenced Yeats, Erza Pound, and possibly, Jung.
 
 
NoFixedAbode
00:20 / 09.11.06
Hey, thanks for all the very informative posts.

I think I'll go with the operational belief that GD rituals are more about giving the devil his due, pragmatically working with the powers that be, so to speak, instead of worship or invocation.

Thanks also for the references to futher information, which I'll follow up on.
 
 
werwolf
12:06 / 09.11.06
a bit late, but just as well: i found it always helps to have a historical look (however heuristic they are / might be) at the origins of spiritual developments whenever possible.

i can recommed GERALD MESSADIE's 'universalgeschichte des bösen' - i apologize for not knowing the original title nor the english one, but i would believe it is called 'a history of the devil' in english and was released somewhere between 1996 to 1999. it's a good starter.
 
 
NoFixedAbode
16:00 / 19.11.06
I've found some information in Robert Ledvidge's "The Gnostic Handbook".

In the section called El, Yahweh and Reconsidering the Bible, he makes the claim that the writings of the Old Testament have been distorted by the demiurge/Yahweh/Ialdoboath with many names co-opted from previous usage, including Yahweh:

"As mentioned above the Old Testament is a very difficult text for the Gnostic to deal with. Most of the names of the Lord of Wisdom have been co-opted by the Demiurge and used to his own end. For example, Elohim is a plural term and means the mighty ones. These mighty ones can be messengers of light or of darkness, in the Old Testament they tend to represent the dominions of the Demiurge but the term is really quite ambiguous. The term Yahweh is much the same, it is actually a secret formula represented the four principles, however, the Pharisaic scribes used it as a designation for the storm God who in the end is called Yahweh or in corrupted English, Jehovah."

So it seems that the demiurge could have co-opted the name Yahweh for itself...
 
 
Unconditional Love
01:00 / 20.11.06
From what i remember the demiurge is the face that looks upon the waters see his own face and then proclaims himself the creator, goes on to claim language number etc, the word as his creation and carries on naming things from there.

You could see that as egoic creation, ie the creation of the self as an idea, collection of associations.

What it seems to miss is physicality, and pure undifferentiated consciousness, the clear light and many other metaphors, the illuminated darkness being another.

The false self views itself as the centre of all creation and is locked into the products of its own self created desires and obsessions, not stopping to see the beauty and terror of physicality, and not empty enough of demiurgic consciousness to experience pure undifferentiated consciousness.

This is all from memory mixed with experience of the ideas of gnosticism, so its in no way authoriative.
 
 
Papess
13:40 / 28.11.06
...the demiurge is the face that looks upon the waters see his own face and then proclaims himself the creator...

The demiurge is in Da'ath?
 
 
Unconditional Love
17:30 / 29.11.06
I hadnt considered that but in a funny way that makes some sense, daath can be considered a transit point between divine knowledge and earthly knowledge, so for the demiurge to consider to see the reflection of divine creation rather than the source, makes some sense, to then attribute that to himself as he beholds all of creation, the knowledge of creation passing through him does make a weird sense.
 
 
Papess
18:28 / 29.11.06
Yes, that is exactly what I meant, Yah Naa Aah Paw. The only problem being, the model fits, but the formula doesn't. I would like to suggest that there is an element missing in the formula. Perhaps that of Sophia, comes to mind.
 
 
Papess
14:21 / 05.12.06
The "26" Thread. This thread might be of help to this topic. I am too daft to figure it out, but I think it may be relevant.

Mr.Dirt really knows hir stuff, too.
 
 
archim3des
02:17 / 26.12.06
I haven't really checked these boards in a while, but as always i find something currently relevant to the way I'm relating to the world. I've spent the past several monthes in a similar place, spending my time focusing on the works of Crowley, Isreal Regardie, and A.E. Waite, in addition to classical Qabalism, so I'll take a swing at it.

So are the Gnostics and the Hermeticist/GDers at odds? I don't rightly know, I've never been in a room with both at the same time. But I think the classic Gnostics would be of a variety of opinions on the subject, those that could actually extomporize on their own dogma. I'm also of the opinion that the occult rennaisance of the past 200 years, the Hermeticist/GD perspective has at its core the synthesis of the whole of western mysticism,, whereas the original Gnostic movement was a waypoint to this most recent of emergence of Magick.

Though of a variety of creeds, the Classical Christian Gnostics had some unity of theogony, the genesis story. SOPHIA, being the utmost attribution of Divine Wisdom, below only the Godhead, desired greatly for greater union with the Godhead, and this desire became twisted, and formed in the womb of SOPHIA. IALDABOATH was born of this twisted desire. Do to his impure nature the Godhead cast IALDABOATH out of the Heaven, or the Pleroma as its called in the Pistis Sophia. IALDABOATH then set about creating the Universe in his own image. In a variety of different texts, many stories where collected about the knowledge related to IALDABOATH by the various divine emanations of the Godhead before the Fall. One was that he was to make Man in his image, which he did, but since he was a creating wholly of the SOPHIA in her selfish desire for the Godhead, he was not possessed of the true spark of divine light, thus so was ADAM, the first Man, created without spirit. The SOPHIA did bless him with this, and sent her daughter ZOE, meaning "life", who after spending time with ADAM, IALDABOATH, and his archons discovered her, and attempted to destroy her. She turned into the tree, which the Gnostics identified with the Tree of Life. In the Gnostic version, IALDABOATH commanded ADAM, not to eat of the Tree of Life as it was Evil, since further communion with EVE could possibly endanger the hegemony of IALDABOATH. Gnostics also referred to IALDABOATH with the name SAMAEL and YHVH, and that YAHWAH and IALDABOATH are one the same, IALDABOATH, being some barbarization of the Hebrew term.


Now, as a studying Hermeticist, I would tell you a whole different story. AIN manifested AIN SOPH, and they manifest AIN SOPH AUR, and AIN SOPH AUR did project KETHER from itself, and in its perception of its own monad nature, the perception of itself constituted the self perceived, and the eidolon, the act of self perception, generates duality, in CHOKMAH, and the same formula produces the third eidolon, BINAH. KETHER, undifferentiated and duosexual divine light did manifest the divine male and female, CHOKMAH and BINAH, or the ABBA ELOHIM and the AIMA ELOHIM, the Divine Mother and Father, together known as ELOHIM, the deific entity which created ADAM and EVE in the Christian bible. In volumes I and II of Israel Regardies several versions of the gensis story are given, and that is one perspective. As a Hermeticist I would thus say that IALDABOATH being the creation of the SOPHIA would have to have been a birthed from the AIMA ELOHIM, BINAH, also known as Wisdom. This perspective is also reinforced by the fact that IALDABOATH is one aspect of a 7-part whole. The original Gnostics said that after its exile from Heaven, IALDABOATH created 6 other rulers of the universe, his archons, and these 7 ruled the universe together. 7 is a very specific number to use, and is also the number of sephira below BINAH, 3. Thus IALDABOATH compromises a completion of the Tree of Life, in addition to the divine mother and father, and the godhead itself.


Another point of I would identify in my analysis is the correlation of IALDABOATH with SAMAEL, the Demonic King of the Qlippoth of Kether, the highest personification of that fallen sephira. The Qlippothes being the first creation, which failed, as the Sephira created could not support the divine light, and shattered. The Qlippoths are the foundation of the current universe. GD Qabalisits seem to identify Qlippothic Tree, or the Averse Tree with either Assiah, or a sub realm beneath the Tree in the Four Worlds. So thus the Qlippothic Tree represents either the material element, or the unredeemed material element. SAMAEL being Chief of the Averse Tree is thus the Chief of unredeemed matter. Matter and existence devoid of meaning.

Now I do not believe that the universe was created in 7 days being abstract deific entities with hebrew and greek names, but the metaphors for psychological experience are profound. I would say that IALDABOATH is thspecifc intelligence which formulated the first creation, in its 7 days, being the anthropomorphization of the 7 original sephira below the supernal triad. The Fall of IALDABOATH finds and easy correspondance with the inability of the original sephira to hold the divine light, and their shattering and rendering into Qlippothes. In the second creation the YHVH formula was set upon the universe at its creation, not after the creation of the supernal triad. Thus the universe was more truly equilibrated, and managed to hold the divine light in whatever proportion is neccesary not to shatter a sephira.

I would therefore see IALDABOATH as the brute intelligence existing before initiation, the demiurge which creates flawed and empty existence because it is nature is unbalanced, therefore it cannot create balanced creation. IALDABOATH is the guy who runs the haphazard brain of the mundane intelligence. IALDABOATH is the guy who is in charge when the will is not unified with the mind, and might even be averse to the actual goals of the conscious mind. YHVH might then be the equibrated intelligence, the mind seeking to understand itself.

Correllations could also be drawn between IALDABOATH and ABRAXAS, but different from the way IALDABOATH relates to SAMAEL. ABRAXAS is a haptagrammaton, a 7-leter intelligence, as compared to YHVH, a tetragrammaton. The 7 letter name of ABRAXAS represents the Gnostic intelligence of the 7 planets, perhaps the intelligence of IALDABOATH and its unity with its 6 other archons. Also correlating to the 7 classical planets, ABRAXAS perhaps represents a sort of balance achieved through the manifestion of the planets, which IALDABOATH does not possess when it exists indepependent of its other aspects.


Sorry if I've included to much information, its hard not to when dealing with anything relating to this subject matter.
 
 
Papess
17:48 / 26.12.06
What a brilliant analysis, archim3des. It is hard to parse this kind of information down, but you were as conscise as possible. Thank you for explaining with such clarity.

I do take a small beef with the perception of Sophia as "selfish". I think in these types of abstractions, if we begin to apply characteristics to one aspect of this equation, then we have to do the same for all aspects. Plus, how is it that we, from our perspective, develop such rash judgements about a divine principle. In a way, it seems incongruent with the rest of your analysis, which was quite even-handed, otherwise.

I would like to reply to the rest of what you posted, but I am about to paint a volcano.
 
 
archim3des
18:13 / 27.12.06
Thanks for pointing that out Justrix. I really hadn't extracted the story out that far. I actually was repeating wrote a specific gnostic genesis story as i had found elsewhere.

I related the story above as i have found it in several resources, which all maintain some concept of greed, or selfishness on the part of SOPHIA, as if it were a neccesary part of the formulation of IALDABOATH, and thus the universe. Ironically enough it was the early christian fathers, who IMHO were better pagans than christians, that pointed out the same thing. If the the original Godhead was perfect, the PLeroma, the Heaven around it would also be perfect, and SOPHIA would also be perfect, and therefore incapable of producing imperfection, thus IALDABOATH would not have been casted out of the Pleroma, Heaveb, for being imperfect. The church fathers reasoned that either the Gnostic creation story was untrue, or a false story based on false logic, the work of the Adversary, the Devil. Those arguemments where much used by the christian rhetors and defenders of the faith around the mediterranean world.

In my opinion, that story is an exoteric version of a christian mystery cult. The most proliferant artifact we have today of the gnostics are stone amulets they would throw in wells for good luck. These amulets have pictures of ABRAXAS, ZOE, various angels invoked for luck, love, or some other supertitious folk charm.

Therefore the story doesn't have to work on that level. Perhaps in some later level of initiation into the cult, one was initiate into the relevant mystery. Perhaps SOPHIA is imagined as some blend of the BINAH relevant symbols and attributions, Selfishness sounds very akin to Severity, which it rules. In the days of Zeus one didn't have to walk to far from one's own home to find devout worshippers of Zeus, Jupiter, or any of the other names of the sky-father. An initiation based on the prototypical Zeus/jupiter story, where his mother Rhea flees Cronus, the great Titan, not unlike IALDABOATH. The symbolic slaying of IALDABOATH would be attributed to the slaying of CRONUS and the found of OLYMPUS, or the temple to the true God of the Universe, not the Demiurge.
 
  
Add Your Reply