This is addressed to anyone who possesses an understanding of Jung and an understanding of Gnosticism, not as taken from Jung's understanding, but from your own studies of independent Gnostic sources.
In my studies of Gnosticism, including The Gnostic Religion by Jonas, which is a specific study of the various schools called “Gnostic,” both “pagan” (Syriac-Egyptian [Valentinian and others] and Iranian [Manichean], and Christian, and of the history of the development of this cosmology, I come away with a far different view and understanding of Gnosticism than Jung, who claimed himself to be Gnostic in his view. To be brief, Gnostics, in general, saw the “cosmos” as created in “error” and egotism (at best) by the Demiurge son of Sophia, consort/mate of the Foremost God. The Gnostic view is that, between Spirit and Matter, the twain cannot meet. Being incarnate is imprisonment for the Spirit, and it must go through seemingly endless forms and their lives before it can finally return to the “First Father.” This is a most simplistic and brief summation of an extremely complex narrative which I will present in my blog: Metaphysical Forces in Flux: What on Earth is Happening? (metaphysicalforcesinplay.blogspot.com). To the Gnostic mind, nature or the world, as well as the whole cosmos itself, is certainly NOT “sacred” at all, but is to be endured and worked through. The myth of Narcissus would be a Gnostic tale, for it relates the mesmerizing beauty of the reflection of the Light of God in nature, including human beings, and of the enchanting illusion it creates for us and holds us in.
Jung seems to have another view of Gnosticism as universal and unifying, which is actually a Platonic (and Platonic-Christian) perspective. Gnosticism has logically evolved, through Sts. Paul, Augustine, and other Church Fathers, into Calvinistic views expressed either in Puritanism or Libertinism (also noted by Jonas). Catharism fits into the latter category (which is another narrative as well).
Jung also equates Gnosticism with alchemy. In my studies of Gnosticism, Hermeticism, and Alchemy, I admit that there is some overlapping (in one section of the Poimandres by Hermes Trismegistus), but that they are far more distinct than Jung (and his followers) seem to comprehend. Without going in to details, the indications from Gnostic and Hermetic sources is that Gnostics were NOT engaged in alchemy, nor were they interested in magic or sorcery. I think Jung mistakenly merged Gnosticism with Hermeticism, which is strange because they are essentially oppositional (according to Ebeling’s The Secret History of Hermes Trismegistus: Hermetism from Ancient to Modern Times). Regarding Hermeticism, there were two main schools: Southern European (Italy) and Northern European (Germany). The Southern School was more “spiritually-inclined” and Christian, whereas the Northern School was more “magically-inclined,” practiced alchemy, and “pagan.” Paracelsus is connected closely with the Northern School ("Alchemo-Paracelcism"). I consequently have to question Jung’s notion of himself as a “gnostic,” since both the earth and nature were anathema to the Gnostics as far as sacredness was concerned, or that he discerned the profound differences between Gnosticism and Hermeticism.
If anyone has any thoughts regarding these issues, I would be most willing to hear what you have to say, but, as noted above, it is important that they come from your own understanding and interpretation.
No comments:
Post a Comment