Luminous polytheist Buddhism

Invasion of the Body Snatchers 1978 - The seed is planted... terror grows. 

Whereas in the narrative of the beginnings of the “Great recluse” (mahāsamaṇa) the gods seemed to occupy a minor place as protectors, disciples or admirers, and the death (parinibbana) of the Buddha was initially viewed as a disaster, this very soon changed with the disputes about the nature of nibbana and the deification of the Buddha, who became one of the many Buddhas that preceded and followed Śākyamuni, waiting for their turn in Tuṣita heaven in the company of gods. It became generally assumed that successful followers of the Buddha lived in the highest heavens of the Buddhist cosmos together with the gods, and shared the same, or often far superior, godlike powers. It would probably be difficult for mere mortals to distinguish between bodhisattvas and gods, when ascending into a divine realm after their death.

The universalist (mahāyāna) and esoteric forms of Buddhism have a lot in common with the other religions as they developed around the beginning of our era, specifically during Hellenistic and Roman times in the Mediterranean basin and farther eastward. Whether Christ was the Son of God, an angel etc., he “was sent” from above, or considered from the start as a savior by those following him. The earlier hagiographies of the Buddha don’t present him as someone with a mission except the one that he fixed for himself: mokṣa. Prince Gautama discovered “Buddhadharma” and initially hesitated to share it, before he decided to become a teacher. Whether these hagiographic versions are partly based on the real events of a historic individual or legends we will probably never know. By lack of proof for a historic Buddha we have many versions of the life he is thought to have led and the things he is thought to have said. Everything in the scriptures is known by hearsay (oral transmission) and the transmissions, interpretations, prequels and spin-offs thereof (see e.g. the Mahāvastu).

This is how “Buddhism” developed and instead of speaking of “the Words” of “the Buddha” we ought to speak of “Buddhism”, what Buddhists believed and did, and believe and do. By these standards the large majority of Buddhists in the world were and are “polytheists”, and the “Buddhism” they follow is a religion, that --like many religions-- also incorporates ethics, religious and secular precepts, methods of contemplation, prayer and “wisdom” in the largest sense of the word. As for other religions, the afterlife is one of its main concerns.

Buddhist tradition speaks of a split between the sect of the “Elders” (Sthavira) and the “the Great Sangha" (Mahāsāṃghika) after the Second Buddhist council, which may have occurred during or after the reign of Ashoka (c. 268 to 232 BCE), who according to Buddhist tradition had a Gandharan grandmother. The universalist (“Great”) approach of Buddhism seems very compatible with Ashoka’s and the Mauryan’s “universalism”, as known through Ashoka's rock edicts engraved on pillars in a Greek-influenced style ("Hellenistic baroque”).

The Lotus Sutra (Saddharma Puṇḍarīka Sūtra, 1st century BCE - 2nd century CE) presents a clearly deified Buddha with transcendent qualities, a savior that can manifest himself in various forms. Unlike the human “Unbound Buddha” that freed himself from Saṃsāra, karma and rebirth at his death, the deified Cosmic Buddha is something completely different, more an eternal principle than a human, manifesting in many various ways, including in humans and Buddhas… No more reason to mourn a dead Buddha. This Buddha never dies. This Buddha is a god, or even God (Ādi-Buddha). And candidate-Buddhas, bodhisattvas (e.g. Avalokiteśvara), sharing the heavens with gods are like gods too. The mere invocation of their names can help protect humans against the main dangers.

The universalist message (“the path of the single vehicle”, “The True Dharma [that] is the hidden essence of all the buddhas”) of the Lotus Sūtra is that all sentient beings can become “deified” Buddhas themselves.

“I tell you, O Śāriputra:
All of you are my children,
And I am thus your father.
Since you were burned by the fire
Of various sufferings for many kalpas,
I saved you all
By leading you out of the triple world.
Although I have previously told you
About your parinirvāṇa,
You have only extinguished birth and death
And have not actually attained nirvana.
You should now seek only
The wisdom of the Buddha.”

“I will give sentient beings who have escaped from the triple world all the toys of the Buddha’s meditations and liberations, which are of one character and one kind, are praised by the Noble Ones, and which produce pure and supreme pleasure.”

“All the buddhas, the Best of Humans,
Know that all dharmas are ever without substance
And that the buddha-seeds germinate
Through dependent origination.”

And those who want to destroy “the seed of the Buddha” will suffer the dire consequences of their heinous act.

“Those people who will not accept
And who disparage this [Lotus] sutra,
Will consequently destroy the seed of the Buddha
In the entire world.”[1]

Buddhas and bodhisattvas (“the sons born from the mouths of the buddhas”[2]) of the highest levels are manifestations from the same “Logos”/Dharmakāya, not individuals. They take whatever form is needed to convert and save “their children” from the triple world below, in order to establish them beyond the triple world, not in parinirvāṇa, while remaining active in the triple world. This idea will be further developed in later sūtras, such as the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, the Avataṃsaka Sūtra (Flower Garland Sutra), the Śūraṃgamasamādhi (Śgs, T642). The Avataṃsaka Sūtra describes “a cosmos of infinite realms upon realms”, and a vast network of interconnected Buddhas, bodhisattvas, and worlds, that are basically a display of Logos. In the Śūraṃgamasamādhi this Logos is personified by Superbodhisattva Mañjuśrī, the universal One man orchestra all by himself, and the object of Luminous Praise in “Chanting the Names of Mañjuśrī” (Mañjuśrīnāmasamgīti).

As Etienne Lamotte explains[3] in his Introduction to the French translation of the Śūraṃgamasamādhi (La concentration de la marche héroïque), Rājagṛha is not the place we know, but a Pure land, a buddhakṣetra, and Śākyamuni teaching the sūtra is not the “historical” Buddha, but “a pure ray of wisdom and power”, the embodied “Concentration of Heroic Progress”. And so is Mañjuśrī who plays an important part in this Sūtra as another embodiment of Concentration of Heroic Progress, and the one man orchestra of the cosmos, i.e. Mañjuśrī’s stage where he can play all the roles, including that of Māra. He can even stage the nirvāṇa of a Pratyekabuddha at times when there are no Buddhas.

“127. Manjusri, you should know that I [Śākyamuni] exercise this supernormal power everywhere in innumerable (apramāṇa) and infinite (ananta) koṭinayutaśatasahasrāṇis of buddhakṣetras, but the Śrāvakas and Pratyekabuddhas do not know this. Such is, O Mañjuśrī, the supremacy (ārṣabha) of the Śūraṃgamasamādhi bodhisattvas, even while always manifesting such wondrous feats (vikurvaṇa) in innumerable universes, never swerve from this samādhi. 128. Mañjuśrī, just as the sun (śūrya) and moon (candra), without ever leaving their palaces (vimāna), illuminate villages (grāma), towns (nagara) and districts (nigama), so the bodhisattvas, without ever swerving from the Śūraṃgamasamādhi, manifest themselves everywhere in innumerable universes and expound the Dharma according to the aspirations (adhimukti) of beings.”

Mañjuśrī and other bodhisattvas (Maitreya, 156) are capable of doing this, because of this Concentration, and there are many ways of practising it (154). In “reality”, Mañjuśrī has already been a Buddha named Nāgavamsagra (159), but the cosmic show must go on, and so he pretends to be Mañjuśrī in the Concentration of Heroic Progress. Is there anything in the whole cosmos that is not “Concentrationally” accounted for? Including evildoers and Māra, the Lord of evildoers (89-100)? Isn’t this is a sort of pantheism, “ the belief that the divine intersects every part of the universe and also extends beyond space and time”, and that everything is actually alright.

Even Māra pretends to convert, and arouses bodhicitta for the wrong reasons, whereafter the Buddha predicts Māra’s future Buddhahood. The Heroic Progress is unstoppable. Even bad monks "in the future to come" are accounted for.

“96. Then the Buddha said to the bodhisattva Dṛḍhamati: Today Māra Pāpīmat aroused the bodhicitta in order to be unbound, and not with a pure intention (adhyāśaya). Equally, O Dṛḍhamati, after my Nirvāṇa [at the end of time, in the final period], in the last five hundred years (mama parinirvṛtasya, paścime kale, paścime samaye, pascimāyām pañcaśatyām vartamānāyām), numerous bhikṣus will arouse the bodhicitta for material gains (lābha) and not with a pure intention (adhyāśaya).”

No problem. Nothing escapes the project of the Cosmic Buddha where everything seems like it was staged by Buddhas and bodhisattvas in their Concentration. All beings in the cosmos look like empty shells secretly run by the Concentration of Heroic Progress. Only the act of arousing bodhicitta seems “real”, or the Concentration of Heroic Progress for that matter. All other religious acts don’t have real efficiency and don’t really matter. Yet they take place and fill the lives, time and space of those progressing heroically, unbeknownst to themselves and despite themselves.

“[The bodhisattva in Śūraṃgamasamādhi] takes up the religious life in an heretical order (pāsaṇdikeṣu pravrajati) in order to win over beings, but he does not really take it up (pravrajyā), he is not defiled (kliṣṭa) by all the false views (mithyādṛṣṭi) which prevail there and does not give any credence (prasāda) to them. He seems to adopt the bodily attitudes (īryāpatha) of the heretics (pāsaṇḍika), but does not conduct himself in accordance with them. (32)”

The only real offence is to not arouse bodhicitta or to ignore the Concentration of Heroic Progress, or to destroy one's defilements...

“O Bhagavat, a man guilty of the five offences of immediate fruition (pañcānantarya) who hears the Śūraṃgamasamādhi expounded is superior to the [holy one who has] entered into the certainty (avakrāntaniyāma) and to the arhat who has destroyed all the defilements (kṣiṇāsrava. Why? The man who is guilty of the pañcānantaryas, on hearing the Śūraṃgamasamādhi expounded, arouses the anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhicitta and even if, because of his previous misdeeds (pūrvapāpakarman), he falls into the hells (naraka), the merit (kuśalamūla) of having heard the Śūraṃgamasamādhi enables him to become a Buddha. Conversely, the arhat who has destroyed the defilements (kṣiṇāsrava) is like a broken receptacle (chinnabādjana): never could he make use of the Śūraṃgamasamādhi.” (150)

Why? Because he could not behave in worldly or evil (Māra) ways. He could not, like the bodhisattva Māragocarānupalipta, convert two hundred daughters of Māra (devakanyās) deeply attached to the pleasures of the senses (kāmarāgatisakta) by making love to them simultaneously through "creating through transformation" two hundred devaputras, sons of gods, of perfect beauty, identical to his own (94). He could not act like a “banker, householder, minor king, great king, warrior, brahmin or śūdra” (122-123, for this topic also see the Gaṇḍavyūha sūtra, in particular the passage about king Anala).

The world of Māra and the world of Buddha share the same essence. There is no duality and no difference (114)[4]. The world, as it is, is filled with suffering everywhere, like a house on fire (Lotus sūtra). Yet everything ought to be left as it is, because everything is in the good hands of bodhisattvas and under the control of the Concentration of Heroic Progress.

And so in Buddhist monist polytheism everything is left as it is. The only way out is through arousing bodhicitta and abiding in the Concentration of Heroic Progress, while opportunely remaining on the side of the ones in power in heaven as on earth, because why try and fix anything that cannot be fixed and is and will always remain imperfect anyway? With one’s head in dharmakāya and one’s feet in the mud the world will gradually be taken over by the Concentration of Heroic Progress, without any noticeable difference. Perhaps it already is the case.

***

[1] English translations from THE LOTUS SŪTRA, (Taishō Volume 9, Number 262) Translated from the Chinese of Kumārajīva by Tsugunari Kubo and Akira Yuyama

[2] Just like brahmins are born from the mouth of Brāhma.

[3] “The Buddha Śākyamuni who appears in the Sūtra is not the Buddha of the sixth century B.C.E. whom we call 'historical' and whom the Mahāyānists term 'transformational', that Buddha who was born in the Lumbinī Park, attained enlightenment at Bodh-Gaya, expounded the Dharma for forty-five years, and passed into Nirvāṇa in Pāvā. This is Śākyamuni in Heroic Progress, a pure ray of wisdom and power, who manifests himself simultaneously in our little universe of four continents, in the Great Cosmos from which the latter derives, and in all the great cosmic systems as numerous as the sands of the Ganges; here, he repeats the feat of the historical Buddha; there, he is some divinity; there again, he is a banker, householder, minor king, great king, warrior, brahmin or śūdra (§§ 122-3). “ English translation by Sara Boin-Webb, MOTILAL BANARSIDASS PUBLISHERS, Delhi

[4] “The true nature of the world of Māra (māradhātudharmatā)23* is the true nature of the world of the Buddha (buddhadhātudharmata). Between the māradhātudharmatā and the buddhadhātudharmatā there is neither duality (dvaya) nor difference (viśeṣa). And we do not leave, do not exceed that true nature.”

About the nature of "Light" (Nous)

Poimandres, the "shepherd of men", revealing himself to Hermes.
Sesthien boecken, Amsterdam 1643

Hermeticism is not a system. Any text that is attributed to Hermes, can be hermetic. Hermes, being Hermes Tris Megistos, the Thrice great[1], to which texts were attributed in late Antiquity, regardless of their later inclusion in Byzantine and other collections. There is a huge variety of materials attributed to Hermes/Thoth, and, for scholars, their attribution seems to be the lowest common denominator to qualify texts as “hermetical”.

As an aside, we could apply a similar rule to what is considered as “tantric” literature, attributed to a Heruka, Mañjuśrī, Vajrapāṇi, Vajradhara, Maheśvara Śiva, Bhairava and other deities (Nous), whatever the inclusion or exclusion of tantric revelations in “canonical” tantric collections. Not suggesting, but not excluding either, there may have been some intellectual cross-pollination at work between the Middle East and the Far East during Hellenist times or later. Or simply the “Pagan” connection or the “Pagan International” resisting the upcoming "religions".

Hermeticism is said to be “a product of pagan Egyptian Hellenism”[2]. The 17 treaties of what would be called “Corpus Hermeticum” were written in Greek language (using philosophical terminology), but in Egypt, in the 2nd-3rd century of the common era. A sort of marriage between Greek rationality and Egyptian spirituality.

In his works and lectures, prof. dr. Wouter Hanegraaff, explains that hermetic works try to convey the knowledge (gnosis) of reality, God and ourselves. Ultimately everything is Nous, which Hanegraaff insists ought to be translated as Light, universal Light, immeasurable Light. The true nature of reality is “Light”, universal spiritual light. God is Light, reality is Light and human beings are Light. In their ordinary perception human beings don’t see Light, they see objects, because they are “deluded”, in a state of hallucination, and don’t perceive reality as it is. The things that are perceived may seem real, but are in reality universal light. The “Way of Hermes” helps us to awaken from the state of delusion and to perceive the true nature of reality.

The first of the 17 treaties is called Poimandres ("shepherd of men"), the Light or Nous appearing to Hermes (presumably the “I” figure of the revelation). Hanegraaff considers this text as a “Revelation” (apokalupsis).

“One day when I had come to reflect on the things that truly are, and my mind was soaring high while my senses were restrained (as happens to someone overwhelmed by sleep from too much food or from physical exhaustion), an enormous being of immeasurable dimensions seemed to appear to me and call my name. He said to me: “What do you want to hear and see, and learn to understand by your nous?”

“For moderns like us, to say that something “cannot be thought” means that our mind cannot grasp it. Our mind, of course, resides in our brain and is concerned with rational thinking. However, according to ancient Egyptian, Semitic, and Greek anthropologies, our intellectual faculties rather resided in the heart. This must very much be kept in mind (or taken to heart) while reading the Hermetica, where we often encounter references to “knowledge of the heart” or perception through the “eyes of the heart.” For moderns it can be more natural in such cases to speak of “spiritual knowledge” and think of “the soul” rather than “the mind,” although this conflicts in many ways with the original meaning and connotations of such central terms as pneuma (“spirit”), psuchē (“soul”), nous (“mind”), or kardia (“heart”). The problem is that modern terms seldom if ever map very well, and often do not map at all, on the Greek words (or words in any other ancient languages) that they are trying to translate. Nevertheless – and this is where we encounter the essential dilemma – we still cannot avoid using such terms as mind, spirit, soul, or the heart in our attempts to convey how Hermetic authors thought of the faculties for gaining access to higher salvational “knowledge,” often referred to as gnōsis. In our efforts to reveal the meaning of ancient words, we have to resort to modern equivalents that in fact conceal their meaning; and yet we have no choice, because only through such acts of concealment can we hope to reveal at least something of the original.[3]”

I will use Hanegraaff’s podcast (Wouter Hanegraaff on the Poimandres) from here. Nous as knowledge, does not refer to mental or intellectual activities, but to what goes “beyond” them[4]. Therefore it would be more correct to speak of “Hermetic spirituality” (or practice) than of “Hermetic philosophy”. Nous not only refers to the perception of reality, but also to that reality itself. It’s both ontological and epistemological.[5] It is sometimes thought to refer to “God”, but in that case not the highest “God”. Not the Ennead, or the beyond of the Ennead (see below). Poimandres is the God that presents himself to the human mind, and is described as “Your God”, “I am the God for you [Hermes]”. Hanegraaff summarizes the Poimandres in the podcast. Hermes wants 1. to know the things that really are and 2. he wants to know God. 

Poimandres then changes his appearance into an Immeasurable Light, the Universal Light, a beautiful, loveable light. Light is what really is (1). And Light itself is the manifestation of something higher (2), going beyond Poimandres. Poimandres explains to Hermes that he (Poimandres) is that Light, and that Hermes is also part of that Light. Hermes’ Nous is equivalent to the Nous of Divinity. “Know the Light and get acquainted with it”. This form of “knowing” is more than knowing it’s a “noetic understanding”. Then Poimandres looks straight into the eyes of Hermes and Hermes looks straight back into the eyes of Poimandres, without any distinction between subject and object. Hermes is Light and is looking into Light, and in a certain way looking into his own eyes. There is no distinction between the ultimate reality of Nous and (Hermes) himself. Hermes himself is Nous and is divine, noetic light. This answers both questions of Hermes.

This direct gaze with no words, a direct realisation, is an essential part of the Poimandres. Another important concept of this text is Logos. Poimandres explains:

“I am that light … the nous, your God, which existed prior to the moist substance that appeared out of the darkness. The luminous logos that came from the nous [is the son of God]. … Know this: that in you which sees and hears is the [Lord’s] logos, and [your] nous is God [the father]. They are not separate, for their union is life.[6]”

The direct realisation doesn’t happen through the Logos (“which sees and hears”), but directly through the Nous. It’s a silent moment, which is neither visual nor auditory.

From this point onwards Poimandres starts explaining the Myth, or rather shows how the world came into being, from the Nous. What we see (and hear, etc.) is phenomenal reality, not the ultimate reality, although it appears as real to us.

1. From the Immeasurable Light (Nous) appears a chaotic darkness that seems distinct from it. From the darkness resounds a cry (“the voice of fire”, but actually the voice of Light according to Jean-Pierre Mahé). The Light of Nous reacts to the cry by sending down the Logos, as a manifestation of itself, and the Logos brings some first rudimentary order (the four elements) into the chaos of darkness.

Screen capture from Prof. dr. Wouter Hanegraaff

2. The androgynous divine Nous, is often described as “the Father”, but is actually both Father and Mother[7]. It can generate everything at once by itself, and doesn’t need a partner. It already generated the dark matter and the demiurge is created next. The demiurge molds and shapes the dark matter into the harmony of the planetary system. The seven planets and the cosmic spheres are thus created.

3. Then follows the creation of the Great Human, the anthropos (“the great man” skt. mahāpuruṣa), which again is a gendered word for an androgynous human. Yet, the chaotic matter manifests itself as “female” and the Great Human as predominantly male, although by nature both are androgynous.

4. The Human is the favorite manifestation of the Nous, and God/Father himself falls in love with it and wants to give the full power to the anthropos. He puts him in charge of creation. The Human, looking down, wants to act like the demiurge and create for himself. He obtains the permission to do so from the Father, which is an important detail. On this point Hermeticism stands apart from other traditions, where this point is considered as the fall of Man into sin. Because of the permission granted by the Nous, there is no transgression in Hermeticism. The Human enters the sphere of the demiurge, learns its crafts, and is welcomed by the (seven) planetary spheres. He is loved by God and the planets because of his beauty. Bending down over the lowest planet, Earth, the Human sees Nature (physis). Nature looks back up at him (endowed with all powers of divinity) with a smile and falls in love with him. The Human falls in love with Nature.

This is an important point for Hanegraaff, about which different theories exist. This part of the Poimandres is heavily corrupted. Some consider it is about the fall of the Human. Some think the Human falls narcissistically in love with its own reflection in the waters of Nature. The Human goes down, and the Human and Nature become lovers. In some “fin de siecle” scholarly interpretations, Nature seduces the Human and when he’s near enough, Nature grabs him and draws him under the surface, as a Satanic feminine. Demonic femininity seducing and drawing down the pure masculine into sexuality...

In fact the Human and Nature fall in love and become lovers, without any “fall”, and under the loving eye of the Father. Their love/union produces seven great androgynous humans, made from matter and Nous, which is considered as a great miracle, since they unite Heaven and Earth. Noetic/spiritual reality is brought into matter, and matter is thus beautified. The seven live for a whole season, after which God intervenes and splits them up into male and female, thus creating fourteen male and female entities. God tells them to multiply and spread over the world. This is the beginning of humanity and of mortal bodies.

“Grow and keep growing, multiply and keep multiplying, all you who have been fashioned and made! And may he who has nous recognize that he is immortal [kai anagnōrisatō <ho> ennous heauton onta athanaton] and that erōs is the cause of death, and may he know all that is[8].”

God is not against sex… Stating that erōs is the cause of death is merely pointing out that “all material bodies [are] mortal composites, but [that] all such bodies are born from sexual desire.[9]” The “Fall” interpretation of the Myth comes from Biblical notions of sin and the fall into sin..

“Once we have absorbed this basic point, everything else falls into place. Only knowledge of what is truly eternal, the nous, enables human beings to cultivate their immortal potential; and only by understanding that no other reality truly exists will they realize that in gaining knowledge of themselves, they gain knowledge of all that is[10].”

In this “love story between the Human and Nature”, all humans have been given the freedom to realize that knowledge, with “matter [as] a mirror of noetic perfection”, or to forget “their noetic potential”. Often the love story between e.g. Adam and Eve has been interpreted as a fall into sin though sex, and with sex being the cause of death, mortality. Death as punishment for sex. For Hanegraaff, the Poimandres is about what exactly one focuses one's attention on. The main choice between living focused on mortal bodies, and living in a bodily environment while remaining connected to the noetic world. Mortal bodies are not the ultimate reality. Without realizing this, gnōsis[11], there is no way out of that focus, and one enters a cycle of reincarnation “beneath the surface of noetic awareness”[12], in a “disenchanted world”. Poimandres’ answer is to keep a balance between Nous and the body.

An important difference between Hermeticism and Gnosticism is the role of the body. In Gnosticism, the body and matter are problematic and need to be transcended. In the Poimandres, passions are the problem, mainly the attraction to negative desires (sex, power, wealth…[13]). More Platonist influences can be found in e.g. Treatise IV, where the body is compared to a vessel filled with Nous. And another Treatise (XII[14]) explains that when the soul enters the body, it enters a kind of vessel polluted with negative desires, that poison the soul that therefore loses sight of the Nous. The origin of the soul is thought to be beyond the cosmos, outside of time and space, but the soul enters the sphere of time and space, and its states (of consciousness) are altered through this descent. According to Hanegraaff, Hermeticism has too often been interpreted through Gnosticism, thus changing its core message.

Daimones, Pompei, Museum of Naples

According to Gnosticism the soul is imprisoned in the body and has to escape from it and return to its divine origin. According to Hermeticism, the soul is not imprisoned in the body and does not need to escape from it. Passions are the problem, not the body[15]. In Hermetic literature at the moment the soul enters the body, the body gets invaded by daimons at a specific place and a specific time on the Earth at the very moment of birth, specified by the position of the stars and planets. These daimons will remain with the soul for the rest of its earthly life and have a harmful influence on the life of the body they invaded, stimulating harmful emotions, creating addictions and making us run after phantasms, thus poisoning the consciousness. “The daimons made me do it!”.

On the influence of the Poimandres on the “way of Hermes” (Iamblichus), of which hermetica is a part. Here I will be following Hermetic Spirituality and Altered states of Knowledge, a lecture by Prof. dr. Wouter Hanegraaff on December 15th 2022.

Hermetica has to be seen as a spiritual path, not as a philosophy, although it has philosophical theories. These serve as an underpinning to the spiritual path that develops the inner person. The path leads from a view where materiality predominates to a view (re)connected to the Nous. The goal of the path explained in the treatises following the Poimandres is to break the exclusive power of the bodily senses over our minds, in order to perceive again our essential connection to the Nous. The Poimandres is a sort of original enlightening event. Once “enlightened” there still is a long path to go for Hermes. This enlightenment needs to be further cultivated in order to become part of his life. The other treatises set out a path, going through stages, where the philosophical theories are learned in combination with “meditational practices” (podcast). Philosophy was a way of life (Pierre Hadot) and this is true as well for Hermetica. Yet their meditational practises went far beyond the standard practices of the other Greek traditions. These are techniques for the alteration of consciousness. In order to see things that we usually don’t see with our normal senses. We don’t have the details about these techniques, but we can see the progression in the stages of consciousness and their awareness of realities that initially were not perceived. These techniques are mentioned in particular in Treatises XIII and in the Ogdoad and the Ennead/Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth (Nag Hammadi Codex VI), with the objective to get back in touch with the noetic world.

Screen capture from Prof. dr. Wouter Hanegraaff

It’s about creating eusebeia (reverence, great respect)[16], which Hanegraaff sees as something more important than the pursuit of gnosis in Hermeticism, and glosses as being an attitude of wonder, of respect and admiration for God or for God’s creation, i.e. anything beautiful, good and true. Therefore the first task is to live a life of reverence, whether one has gnosis or not. The gods are believed to forgive anything, but not asebeia (“irreverence towards the state gods"), “a lack of reverence”. Those living a life of eusebeia, reverence, will find salvation after death. The Poimandres describes how the soul travels (back) upwards, going through the seven planets (spheres), leaving the cosmos and reaching the “sphere of the souls” ("Life"), also called the ogdoad (the eighth sphere). The ultimate essence of the soul is ultimate spiritual divine “Light” (Nous). If a soul then unites with the “Light” that is its real Self, its essence, it reaches the “sphere of Nous” (the noetic ninth sphere, Ennead). Everything is Light, anything that’s “not Light” is delusion.

When hermetic authors talk about “God”, they actually mean the Nous, the universal Light of divinity, the Nineth sphere, the only thing that really truly exists. The Light of the Nous is identical with our inner Light, the Nous inside ourselves. This Light may blind us through its presence, and we may forget its presence. Hermetica’s aim is to make us aware again of our inner Nous, and that our Inner Light is actually identical with the universal Light of God himself.

There even is a Tenth sphere, called “the One”, or “the Source” or “Fountain”[17]. Hermetic literature has ten levels[18]. Since there is no time and space beyond the cosmos, it is difficult to say that the Tenth level would be higher, or the Ninth and the Eight lower. It’s a mystery. The whole of reality is Life and Light, coming from a totally unknowable inconceivable (acintya) source.

This is a first blog about Hermeticism, which I will consider from an esoteric Buddhist and a “mainstream” Buddhist perspective. It seems to me that there is no genuine conflict between Hermeticism and esoteric Buddhism on “Light” (“God”) and its divine nature, but there may be a deeper conflict between “mainstream” Buddhism and Hermeticism, and consequently also with esoteric Buddhism about the nature of “Light”.

A curious Hermetic (Flammarion engraving)

***

[1] Hart explains that the epithet is derived from an epithet of Thoth found at the Temple of Esna, "Thoth the great, the great, the great". Hart, G., The Routledge Dictionary of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses, 2005, Routledge, second edition, Oxon, p 158

[2] Western Esotericism: A Guide for the Perplexed, Wouter J. Hanegraaff, Bloomsbury Publishing

[3] Hermetic Spirituality and the Historical Imagination: Altered States of Knowledge in Late Antiquity, Wouter J. Hanegraaff, Cambridge University Press (2022)
“Throughout the rest of this volume, I write nous in small letters whenever it seems to mean primarily a human capacity or metaphysical reality, but capitalize it as Nous if the latter functions as a deity.”

[4] In Tibetan blo las ‘das pa.

[5] Episode 104: Wouter Hanegraaff on the Poimandres, 14/10/2020

[6] Hermetic Spirituality, p. 164

[7] Yab yum.

[8] Hermetic Spirituality, p. 176

[9] Hermetic Spirituality, p. 177

[10] Hermetic Spirituality, p. 177

[11] “The goal is spiritual knowledge, gnōsis – literally re-cognition or re-membering of one’s true self as identical with the divine Light and Life, as Poimandres points out to Hermes once again.”

[12] Hermetic Spirituality, p. 179

[13] Treatise XIII, about Rebirth, that gives a list of twelve vices corresponding to the twelve astrological houses.

[14] “As soon as it has entered a body, every soul gets corrupted by pain and pleasure”.

[15] Embassy of the Free Mind, Lecture Hermetic Spirituality and Altered states of Knowledge by Prof. dr. Wouter Hanegraaff, 15/12/2022

[16] Which makes me think of the notions “puja” in sanskrit and “mchod pa” in tibetan.


[17] “I want to speak! Fear restrains me. I have found the beginning of the power that is above all powers, the one that has no beginning. I see a fountain bubbling with life. I have said, my son, that I am Mind [Nous]. I have seen! Language is not able to reveal this. For the entire Ogdoad, my son, and the souls that are in it, and the angels, sing a hymn in silence. And I, Mind [Nous], understand.” The Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth (Nag Hammadi Library), Translated by James Brashler, Peter A. Dirkse, and Douglas M. Parrott

[18] Bhūmi.