Poimandres (Corpus Hermeticum)

[Beshiira]

Inspired by a relatively recent new Finnish translation of Corpus Hermeticum (by Aatma), I thought I could start some discussion on this esoteric classic. It's mentioned here and there on the forum, but there seems to be surprisingly little discussion about the text itself.

I was first thinking to propose a new reading circle, but since they often demand quite a lot of commitment and time, I thought that maybe a lighter version of such a practice could be made.

The first tractate Poimandres is a classic hermetic text, and among the utmost "western esoteric essentials" in general. It deals with quite universal spiritual teachings and metaphysical representations, and offers many different roads that discussions could take. There are 32 quite short verses in the Poimandres text (though the numbering logic seems to differ in different editions), and I thought we could maybe go through them here together. This could be a way to explore this important text for those who maybe haven't been that familiar with the actual writing before (such as myself), but it wouldn't exclude those who are already more versed in hermetic tradition, because the discussion can take so many turns.

For example: I could present each verse, then add a few comments, and then we could discuss freely about whatever comes to mind from that? There have been commentary threads with a more or less similar idea on the forum before, but this thread could be initially even more discussive and interactive; precisely like a ”light reading circle”. If there is interest, that is. No pressure, no strong commitment required, but of course, if someone wants to take turns with me presenting the verses – you're welcome to do so! But I can also be in charge of that, and present new verses for example twice or thrice every week. If this started, say, next week monday, then this project would take until March or May, depending on how many verses we'd discuss every week. And the idea would be to have a discussion with a low threshold to participate, to share our ideas and feelings, maybe a bit like analysing poems, so no deep-end metaphysics is required. Even if some of that might also quite naturally occur at times. And anyone could write something that comes to mind, short or longer, without the obligation to keep commenting later on.

The G.R.S. Mead translation from 1906 is public domain, so it wouldn't be a problem to quote the entire verses from that, and that translation could be a reference point even if we read other versions along the way too. Another one freely available online is the John Everard translation from 1650.


What would this sound like, anyone interested in participating so far?

[Benemal]

I have that from the library and will start reading tomorrow. I'll have something to say about it probably. The subject matter is deeply interesting, especially, if we believe those texts are truly 4000 years old.

[Polyhymnia]

Great idea! I have a couple reading circles on the go already, but I would like to follow along casually for sure.

[Smaragd]

I would like to join with the promise of trying to continue also the Secret Doctrine reading circle as soon as time allows. I've got a newer English translation of the book made by Brian P. Copenhaver. He used the Greek Corpus Hermeticum and the Latin Asclepius as his sources. Most of my books pages are comprised of introduction and extensive notation, which I'm not sure if I have the time to go through here. I'll try to keep my approach light, so I'll focus on the source text itself and making my own interpretations, but perhaps seeking some help from the notes.

[Polyhymnia]

I also have the Copenhaver version (my Classics professor said it's the only scholarly version of the book he's aware of) but I will probably also mostly eschew the notation in favour of a more esoteric interpretation. I also have The Way of Hermes, which seems to be mostly a straight translation. It will be fun to compare both as we go along.

**Edited to say I won't bore you all with the comparison details unless there's something especially striking. Also, "fun" may be a generous term.**

[Beshiira]

Great to see there is interest in this! I would thus suggest a 2 verses per week pace; then we'll have time to share ideas on the verses with no rush. If we go through the Poimandres text like this, we're done in the middle of May. Sounds good, and this can be sort of a consistency practice as well (for me that is; otherwise I wish to keep this as pressure-free as possible).

Nice that you are reading the Copenhaver version. The Finnish translation I'm reading is based on that, as well as on the Mead version, so we are quite in line so far in that sense. Please do share observations regarding the different versions, whenever it feels suitable or fun! (Surely it can be fun too, right?)

If no other suggestions arise, I'll present the verses each Monday and Thursday, starting next week.

[Beshiira]

So, first of all Poimandres is Greek for ”The Shepherd of Men”, and the word is also interpreted to be derived from an Ancient Egyptian expression meaning ”Knowledge of the god Ra”. In the text there's a strong distinction between spirit (cf. life, light, eternity etc.) and matter (cf. death, darkness, finiteness etc.), which is a very usual keynote in spiritual and occult texts; as we know. The human being is seen as a spiritual being in essence.

A lot has been said in the SoA context about this division, and how we should not make the mistake of seeing everything material or physical as something ”bad”, unwanted, unneccessary etc. But while these things are deeply intertwined and ultimately they are one and the same, these kinds of divisions and dichotomies can be useful in the right context. Just like when Jesus said that ”no one can serve two masters”, he didn't mean that we should scorn the material reality, but the point is that our main focus should not be in our immediate material lives, but we should ”seek first the kingdom of God”.

Things said many many times, but this really seems to be in the very core of all spiritual teaching, no matter what era or location or culture is in question. This is what makes spirituality spiritual. And it is stressed once again in Poimandres. The text talks about creation and man's striving towards gnosis and ascension, ultimately leading to oneness with God.

If I've understood correctly, this text can be seen as a dialogue between Hermes Trismegistus and Poimandres. In any case, the setting is that of a teacher and a disciple.


My comments on the verses might differ in length and in style as we progress; I try to be led by intuition, and let the comments represent those ideas and feelings I got at that particular time of writing.


Let us begin with the verses! I'll quote the Mead translation in these posts.

1. It chanced once on a time my mind was meditating on the things that are, my thought was raised to a great height, the senses of my body being held back - just as men who are weighed down with sleep after a fill of food, or from fatigue of body.

Methought a Being more than vast, in size beyond all bounds, called out my name and saith: What wouldst thou hear and see, and what hast thou in mind to learn and know?

Endless interpretations could be made from this short passage alone. Here are some ideas.

”My mind was meditating on the things that are”, meaning that my mind is focused ”rightly”; I am in a state that allows teaching to be received, so to say. My thought is ”raised to a great high”, but my ”body is being held back”, which might imply a trance-like state. The sense of fatigue after a heavy meal comes across very strongly from this. Often in everyday life a heavy meal doesn't exactly ”raise my mind to a great high”; quite the opposite. But here this implies that there has been serious spiritual and/or mental striving in some way or another, before this ”story” begins. Or maybe these sorts of states might be achieved by ”chance” too, at times? Anyway, we're talking about some sort of a mindset different from the mundane everyday life consciousness.

In the second part we are ”face to face” with a ”Being more than vast, in size beyond all bounds”, which must be a transcendental experience. Our comprehension is being expanded, even so that it might shatter what we thought to be reality, which then makes way for much larger understanding. Such shattering is not the psychotic kind, and by no means does this equal developing a mental illness or something, but it's closer to naturally growing out of ones old shell.

Also what stands out is that we are called out by our name. What does it mean? At least one can see there a ”left hand path inclination”; in our striving, ascension and initiation we don't just ”lose ourselves” while letting go of our lower egos, but our ”true name” and ”true being” become more imminent; only by that striving we become truly unique. And that is when we are not only called, but we also answer to that call. It's as if there now comes a point when a great teacher looks at us, acknowledges that we are worthy, and then says: ”Alright, you have come this far. Now, what do you want to know?”

Our answer to this seems like a test itself, that defines our path from this point on. ”Ok, what is it that I want to ask, what do I want to know?”


What are your ideas on the first verse?

[Smaragd]

Endless interpretations could be made from this short passage alone. Here are some ideas.

”My mind was meditating on the things that are”, meaning that my mind is focused ”rightly”; I am in a state that allows teaching to be received, so to say. My thought is ”raised to a great high”, but my ”body is being held back”, which might imply a trance-like state. The sense of fatigue after a heavy meal comes across very strongly from this. Often in everyday life a heavy meal doesn't exactly ”raise my mind to a great high”; quite the opposite. But here this implies that there has been serious spiritual and/or mental striving in some way or another, before this ”story” begins.

The heavy meal and physical toil together also remind me of the mental work one does when the right focus - the red thread - to Knowledge is followed. When one follows it long and consistently enough the way to such occult discourses and visions opens up more and more clearly. From Christian set of symbols we are familiar with the idea of Corpus Christi. To feast on the body of a divinity is to converse with the spirits the body is comprised of, we digest and come to understand the lesser powers of the greater body bit by bit. Then, as we have done this work consistently enough, we are full and ready to sleep, to receive. In fra Nefastos' article on Unseen Fire III, the significance of deep sleep beyond dreams was beautifully pointed as a reunion with our innermost divinity, and this is where our waking striving and search for the red thread also leads us towards. But this receiving does not equal sleep, nor a technical excellence of a hatha yogi who forces oneself to a technical trance state. If we call it a trance, then we must also remember how the state was reached. The mind is clear as it has been striving to follow that which is essential and true ("meditating on the things that are"), it has managed to avoid all the lures, all the will-o'-wisps of kamaloka, of maya, to reach this place, and to continue the same clarity has to remain. The "body being held back" can be interpreted as the student having conquered the beautiful challenges, the lower nature has entrapped us with, has been cast aside and the inner faculties of the outer senses have been made tools to communicate with greater entities.

In the second part we are ”face to face” with a ”Being more than vast, in size beyond all bounds”, which must be a transcendental experience. Our comprehension is being expanded, even so that it might shatter what we thought to be reality, which then makes way for much larger understanding. Such shattering is not the psychotic kind, and by no means does this equal developing a mental illness or something, but it's closer to naturally growing out of ones old shell.

The description of the entity is noticeably Mercurial. The boundless size whisper of the messenger aspect: to be able to act as The Messenger of the Gods, one must have no restrictions in form, yet being still able to create fathomable forms to communicate with lower beings. The Trickster aspect of Mercury is also revealed from your notions of the dangers of larger understanding, for within the expansiveness of this divinity one can hear the echoes of the mad laughter pointed to us when we have tried to approach it with lacking discretion (holistic striving).

In our Mercurial Hymn to the Messenger of Gods, Christus Mysticus is mentioned, and for me it ties everything back to the idea of receiving and actively partaking in the feast of the body of Christ. When mysticism is over emphasised at the expense of other grounding aspects, the Messenger appears again as a trickster babbling half baked intuitions to our ears which are doomed to be nonsense until we will take upon our responsibility to make it a sensible case by separating the grains from the chaff. The mysticism of receiving must be united in the concrete work of digesting the powers of the body - the spiritual sustenance - through active balanced thinking and analyzing, reorganizing the misunderstood or integrating the yet to be understood concepts and ideas. This work should lead to ethical striving.

And that is when we are not only called, but we also answer to that call. It's as if there now comes a point when a great teacher looks at us, acknowledges that we are worthy, and then says: ”Alright, you have come this far. Now, what do you want to know?”

Exactly.

Our answer to this seems like a test itself, that defines our path from this point on. ”Ok, what is it that I want to ask, what do I want to know?”

This may sound insignificant but oh boy, what kind of problems and suffering we could avoid just by managing to reach for the right questions. If we look upon this point in the verse as if the test given here would be veiled in day-to-day human interactions, one can imagine how significant a thing it is to ask the right questions. It defines if a casual meeting with friends becomes a soulful interaction, it may ground things in a heated conversation where you struggle to communicate you have nothing against the other party and your intentions are purely constructive. It is tedious to seek the right form, but it seems bafflingly crucial. Ethical striving truly is the Art.

[Beshiira]

Very good points! I didn't think of that eucharistic notion at all first, but indeed it's a fitting interpretation and brings new angles to the whole setting.

Also, what you wrote about Mercury and Christus Mysticus reminded me of how the Mystical Christ is sometimes perceived as a kind of a field over earth etc.; one more example of that idea of a formless being who still operates via forms. I often associate the correspondency buddhi to this sort of perception as well.

2. And I do say: Who art thou?

He saith: I am Man-Shepherd (Poemandres), Mind of all-masterhood; I know what thou desirest and I'm with thee everywhere.

In the new Finnish version ”Mind of all-masterhood” is translated literally as ”the Mind of the Highest Power”. Everard's translation says ”the Mind of the Great Lord”. All of these bring my thoughts to the Tantric theories regarding Shiva and Shakti, where Shakti is called the Power, while Shiva is the Power-Holder. Poimandres here, as already mentioned above, is like a messenger of God (as is also Hermes traditionally of course), and I guess one could argue that he could be seen also as an active manifestation of God (cf. Shakti). And all the active and passive forms of divinity are of course ultimately One – ”I'm with thee everywhere”.

”I know what thou desirest”; meaning that we are not separate from God or His/Her messengers to begin with, but we are not always aware of this, and it takes effort to learn to know this. When we ”desire” and ”ask for” what our master already knows that we desire, we are already starting to be aligned with our master.

From the Mind aspect comes to mind (pun not intended) Lucifer as a bringer of light, reason and wisdom. Also comes to mind the SoA Prayer: ”Lucifer-Christos, the Soul of God, have mercy on us”. Sure, soul and mind might not be exactly the same thing, but there surely is a connection. Or is there soul without mind, and can there be mind without soul?

Also, Poimandres' answer is a bit similar to the one given by the God of the Old Testament, who says to Moses: ”I Am That I Am”, but more specific. Thus, this is not a depiction of ”The Absolute speaking” or ”God him-/herself” (whatever those mean anyway...), but Poimandres is, once again, a more specific, more defined, more formal divine aspect, or manifestation, or messenger.

[Smaragd]

In the new Finnish version ”Mind of all-masterhood” is translated literally as ”the Mind of the Highest Power”. Everard's translation says ”the Mind of the Great Lord”.

Copenhaver translated it ”mind of sovereignty”, which reminded me of the idea of the ruler of our planet and how in the usual Christian esoteric theory the rule has been seen going over from Satan to Christ for the past ~2000 years. This passing of the scepter reminds me of the special relation between Sun and Mercury in our Celestial Hymns. The esoteric Christ, or Logos, is behind the idea of ”the Blazing Divine Dragon of Wisdom” in Hymn to the Prince of the Countenance, while again Christus Mysticus is meantioned by name in the hymn of Wednesday. It is as if amidst the toil preparing for the great coronation we can see these rulers working adjacently within the fabric of our reality where Satan is half ruling the position of the Messenger of God in it’s jester aspects, while Christ is there within the mystic ”field over the Earth”.

But ofcourse this is just one very limited point of view and they both have their rule over all of the Seven divinities, and in their unlimited nature merging in to each other. The special connection of Sun and Mercury just meets through the emphasis of boundlesness. Today I just happened to be hopping through some of the The Secret Doctrine part II of the first book, the ending of which had a chapter on Avalokiteshwara aka Kwan-Shi-Yin which seem to have many things in common with Poimandres:

The Secret Doctrine teaches that “He who is the first to appear at Renovation will be the last to come before Re-absorption (pralaya).” Thus the logoi of all nations, from the Vedic Visvakarma of the Mysteries down to the Saviour of the present civilised nations, are the “Word” who was “in the beginning” (or the reawakening of the energising powers of Nature) with the One Absolute. -- who finally may be called, as he ever has been, the Alpha and the Omega of manifested Nature. “The great Dragon of Wisdom is born of Fire and Water, and into Fire and Water will all be re-absorbed with him”
...
Kwan-Shi-Yin is Avalokiteshwara, and both are forms of the seventh Universal Principle ; while in its highest metaphysical character this deity is the synthetic aggregation of all the planetary Spirits, Dhyani Chohans. He is the “Self-manifested;” in short, the “Son of the Father.” Crowned with seven dragons, above his statue there appears the inscription Pu-Tsi-K’iun-ling, “the universal Saviour of all living beings.”

All of these bring my thoughts to the Tantric theories regarding Shiva and Shakti, where Shakti is called the Power, while Shiva is the Power-Holder. Poimandres here, as already mentioned above, is like a messenger of God (as is also Hermes traditionally of course), and I guess one could argue that he could be seen also as an active manifestation of God (cf. Shakti). And all the active and passive forms of divinity are of course ultimately One – ”I'm with thee everywhere”.

In that same chapter of the Secret Doctrine there was strikingly similar point:

To close, Kwan-Shi-Yin and Kwan-Yin are the two aspects (male and female) of the same principle in Kosmos, Nature and Man, of divine wisdom and intelligence. They are the “Christos-Sophia” of the mystic Gnostics—the Logos and its Sakti.

In comparison of Shiva (with it’s emphasis as the destroyer) and Christos, the Logo’s reabsorbtion to pralaya seems to be emphasised. It is the aspect of the Logos who by embodying the whole is also the last one closing the lights and the door as the great day of manifestation ends. Christos-Sophia & Shiva-Shakti are an interesting pairings to be compared further, but I won’t go there here.

Hermes as Shakti on the other hand is a thrilling idea and reminds me of one of the many memorable interpretations of sod obnoxion; the one of the shoe salesman Phillip Gerard aka Mike of Twin Peaks being a shakta-man! When thinking of Hermes as a Shakti (visions of little devils preparing all kinds of jesterly traps with higher purpose pour in) and comparing it to the nature of Mike, a deeply intricate world opens up for view. The Mother Power, the mystery nature is so divine that I am afraid to write further elaborations on the symbolic gate the one-handed Mike brought to my mind at first. Still as duty calls, we can take few steps by thinking of Mike as a sort of messenger: he knows something crucial the investigators in the series needs to know, the gate (a feminine attribute) has been opened in him which he tries to keep shut by medication, and one of his arms are missing which is like a shakta-man version of the Major Arcana XIV – Temperance, where the angelic figure has one feet in the water and one feet on the ground, i.e. the hand as more active instruments has been permanently left to the other side. The missing hand is still that of the Mothers, for the linga sharira, although phallic and marking more potential than manifestation, is a manifestation of a subtler level of which the phantom pain of a missing limb can be seen a reminder of.

While Mercury even in it’s jester nature has a distant purity of the ancient civilisations - the memory gilded (reconciled) by thousands of years of work -, as surely as the text we have in our hands here, all the paraller ideas to a contemporary interpretation of a shakti-man is greatly enriching as we see them together adding meaning to each other.