BOOK I - ONTOLOGY




ONTOLOGY


'From the place of the ever living. From the far horizon of the gods. From the moment of the beginning. From the Foundation of all things - I, Upuaut, 'the opener of the ways', come to you, and give to you a gift !
The gift of the 'Books of Foundation' . A gift to those who would seek, and those who would know.'

'But not all can be known. There are limits to the human mind.
But what can be known shall be revealed - for behold, I tell you a mystery, therefore do not sleep, but rather know that from this mystery you shall be transfigured - and you shall put on the new life for all eternity !



THE ONE

The ONE is ineffable, not to be described or named, for the ONE is beyond every name and category, beyond definition, utterance, conception and comprehension, and beyond all terms we may apply.
The ONE is nameless, secret, concealed, holy beyond holiness, and outside the range of all thought.
The ONE is a hidden deity (Lat. deus absconditus), utterly unknown and un-knowable.
Of  the ONE  no words can tell.
Yet men have ever attempted to speculate about the ONE, and to find terms to describe what the ONE  might be.
Thus, the the ONE is said to be the forebeginning, antecedent to all origins and events, being self-existent, unbegotten and uncreated.
As the ONE  is without origin, so the ONE  is without end.
To these privative and negative attributes the gnostics add another, taken from Greek metaphysics, namely, that the divine nature is impassible, incapable of suffering, injury or emotion.
Nor is the the ONE  to be considered in terms of any moral quality, since the ONE  is morally neutral and beyond good and evil.
Again, the ONE is formless, boundless, indivisible, incorporeal, beyond measure, quality, quantity, and not subject to classification.
To the ONE can be applied no concepts of time, space, matter, or substance.
The ONE is immutable, stable and motionless, undergoes no change, has no history.
Through innumerable eternities, the un-originated Godhead, undifferentiated, unitary, alone within himself, remained in profound repose,  immersed in unendurable light.

THE AEONS

A fundamental concept relating to existence is that of a projecting forth (probole), or out-raying of qualities from the divine unity, commonly known as 'emanation'.
The ONE generates or causes existence, not through the intermediary of another, or an opposite, not by creation, reproduction or evolution, but by a unique manifestation that brings into existence a complex, and at times paradoxical, chain of being, forming a descending hierarchy of spiritual entities.
The divine attributes of the ONE , that is, the abstract qualities, mental states, spiritual concepts and metaphysical ideas, constituted the ONE's thoughts and designs, which lay hidden, known to the ONE, but unknown to themselves.
Then the ONE  gave them existence, and they flowed forth from the divine source.
The externalization of the divine attributes in this manner constitutes the first stage of a long process resulting from the overflow or outpouring of the fullness (pleroma) of the ONE.
The entities that emerge from this process are known as aeons, a class of sentient spiritual beings of varying attributes and powers.
Their own qualities, the regions they occupy, the dimensions in which they function, and the time-span of their operations, all likewise become actualized, take on independent existence, and form links in the chain of emanation.
The heavenly hierarchy includes many entities amongst which, in Gnostic classifications, are principalities (archat), powers (dynameis), thrones (thronoi), dominions (kuriotetes), lesser gods (theoi), and archons (archontes).
The most powerful of these are the Aeons, which many humans have taken to be 'gods'.


There are three main worlds - the πλήρωμα - the plērōmathe material realm ('Kingdom') , and  'Foundation' - where the Forms were brought into existence.
It was through through the πλήρωμα - the plērōma and 'Foundation' that the ONE descended, or emanated, the causal powers, which manifested as the Aeons.
In the material world, or 'Kingdom', the Aeons manifest as Nature.
The Aeons may also manifest within the human psyche.
In esoteric terms, the Aeons  are not the lifeless idols they are so often accused of being by the spiritually blind and ignorant.
Rather we can see these images as reflections of a greater Unseen - reflections of the ONE.

In Hebrew thought the term for the Aeons is the Elohim.
Elohim (אֱלֹהִ֔ים) is a grammatically singular or plural noun for 'god' or 'gods' in both modern and ancient Hebrew language.
When used with singular verbs and adjectives, elohim is usually singular, 'god' or especially, the 'god'.
When used with plural verbs and adjectives elohim is usually plural, "gods" or "powers".
The first verse of Psalm 82: ‘Elohim has taken his place in the divine council.’
Here elohim has a singular verb and clearly refers to 'god'.
But in verse 6 of the Psalm, 'god' says to the other members of the council, ‘You [plural] are elohim.’
Here elohim has to mean 'gods'.”
We must not, however, confuse the use of 'elohim - god' with the true concept of god which is the ONE.

There is a further use of the word elohim in the phrase 'Sons of god' (Heb: Bənê hāʼĕlōhîm, בני האלהים) which is a phrase used in the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament.
The offspring of the 'Sons of god' were the "Nephilim" (נְפִילִים), or 'watchers' - the Archons.
The lesser hierarchies include the dæmons.
The word dæmon is a Latinized spelling of the Greek "δαίμων" of ancient Greek religion and mythology, as well as later Hellenistic religion and philosophy.
Daemons are spirit guides, forces of nature or the 'gods' themselves (see Plato's 'Symposium').
In the 'Symposium', the priestess Diotima teaches Socrates that love is not a 'god', but rather a "great daemon" (202d).
She goes on to describe daemons as "interpreting and transporting human things to the 'gods' and divine things to men; entreaties and sacrifices from below, and ordinances and requitals from above..." (202e).
In Plato's 'Apology of Socrates', Socrates claimed to have a daimonion (literally, a "divine something") that frequently warned him - in the form of a "voice" - against mistakes but never told him what to do.
In the Hellenistic ruler cult that began with Alexander the Great, it was not the ruler but his guiding daemon that was venerated.
Similarly, the first-century Roman Imperial cult began by venerating the genius or numen of Augustus.
Eventually daemons were attributed to nations and races.

In Gnostic systems the lesser Egyptian Neters ('gods') and Elohim ('gods') were referred to as  Aeonsἄρχοντες - Archons (rulers).
Some of the archons were the servants of the δημιουργός (Demiurge), the "creator god" that stood between the lesser sentient beings and a transcendent God - the ONE - that could only be reached through gnosis.
The archons are referred to by Porphyry in his exposition of Neo Platonist philosophy, and are often referred to as θεοὶ ἄρχοντες (ruling 'gods') in Hellenistic thought.'

The demiurge - δημιουργός - is a concept from the Platonic, Neopythagorean, Middle Platonic, and Neoplatonic schools of philosophy for a divine figure responsible for the fashioning and maintenance of the physical universe. The term was subsequently adopted by the Gnostics. Although a fashioner, the demiurge is not necessarily thought of as being the same as the creator figure in the familiar monotheistic sense, because both the demiurge itself plus the material from which the demiurge fashions the universe are considered either uncreated and eternal, or the product of some other being, depending on the system.

Plato developed this distinction between true reality and illusion, in arguing that what is real are eternal and unchanging Forms, of which things experienced in sensation are at best merely copies, and real only in so far as they copy ('partake of') such Forms.
In general, Plato presumes that all nouns (e.g., 'Beauty') refer to real entities, whether sensible bodies or insensible Forms, hence, in 'The Sophist' Plato argues that Being is a Form in which all existent things participate and which they have in common (though it is unclear whether 'Being' is intended in the sense of existence, copula, or identity); and argues, against Parmenides, that Forms must exist not only of Being, but also of Negation and of non-Being (or Difference).


No comments:

Post a Comment