3845-Texto Do Artigo-12679-1-10-20131014 PDF
3845-Texto Do Artigo-12679-1-10-20131014 PDF
3845-Texto Do Artigo-12679-1-10-20131014 PDF
REVISTA LUSÓFONA DE CIÊNCIA DAS RELIGIÕES – ANO XI, 2012 / n. 16/17 – 153-175 153
RONALDO GUILHERME GURGEL PEREIRA
category, with any cultural identity and hold any number of possible political/ ide-
ological/ religious inclinations.
It is not possible nowadays to achieve any accord about how the so-called tech-
nical and philosophical Hermetic literatures were used. Distinct groups with specific
interests could produce new interpretations for Hermetic treatises and proposals for
its own use as well. Questions concerning inconsistencies and/ or lacunas were most
simply solved by admitting that the text was an imperfect translation of ‘a lost
Egyptian original’. Moreover, the debate on Hermetic treatises never ceased, so
those lacunas could be “explained” by interpretations promoted by the debate be-
tween Hermetica and other sources, such as Philosophy in some Hermetist circles.
It is clear that different uses of Hermetica could produce different interpretations for
this literature. These different groups taking part in the process of the text’s inter-
pretation represented different possibilities for the text’s assimilation (as knowledge
to be understood), and definition (as a phenomenon to be explained). Following this,
one or more groups in society can use its/their symbolic power in order to pro-
pose/impose what Bourdieu1 defined as consensus, or social order concerning social
integration. This process establishes what the general knowledge calls “sense of or-
der/normality” in the social dimension. Symbolic systems are also utilized as in-
struments for the legitimacy of ideologies, aiming to assure the domination of one
social group over another. By approaching the engagement of social groups in the
process of significance with regards to the Hermetic phenomenon, this paper estab-
lishes a debate on how the Hermetica as literary source could become part of the so-
cial discourse regarding antagonist worldviews. Therefore, it will discuss the rela-
tionship between the so-called technical and philosophical2 Hermetica, and their
interpretations by respective groups of receptors in society.
1
P. Bourdieu, Le Sens Pratique. (Paris: 1980). See also: P. Bourdieu, Language and Symbolic Power. (Har-
vard: 1991).
2
Definitions proposed by Festugière in order to separate Hermetic texts with more emphasis on as-
trology, magic, alchemy , and other esoteric affairs, from those he classified as more connected to theo-
logical and philosophic digressions. See: A.-J. Festugière, La Révélation d`Hermès Trismégiste. (Paris: 1944-
-54).
3 See: G. Fowden, The Egyptian Hermes. (Princeton: 1993), p. 173, n.72: “Tim. Const., Haer., 17b; and
Marc. Anc., Eccl. 6, mentioning “the followers of Hermes and Seleucus” in a list of Gnostics and other
heretics […].”
thors is not discarded, nor is the possibility of some degree of mutual influences be-
tween Christian/Pagan Gnosticism and Hermetism.4
The Gnostic community at Nag Hammadi used Hermetic treatises as part of their
sources. Gnostic adepts and doctrines used to exchange knowledge with one another
and also took information from external beliefs, traditions, etc. The Hermetic trea-
tises were no exception for the Gnostic usages of external sources in their systems.
The Gnostic library of a community at Nag Hammadi is a good example of it.5
Among the Hermetic texts found at Nag Hammadi, there was a previously unknown
discourse, which depicts the protagonists of the Hermetica living in a Gnostic-like
environment. The Nag Hammadi Hermetica portrayed a specific social reality. In
these texts, it is possible to confirm the existence of another way of reception of the
Hermetic texts: the communal study of a group/fraternity/confrary.6 That style of
Hermetic dialogue was totally new, since, in comparison, the anthology called the
Corpus Hermeticum had two protagonists: the master and the disciple, and in ad Asl-
cepius, Hermes teaches Asclepius along with Tat and Ammon.
In the Hermetica from the Nag Hammadi Library, Hermes encourages Tat to
teach others, and the discourse reveals the existence of many others spiritual sons
who were also educated by Hermes.
After I had received the spirit through the power, I set forth the action for you. In-
deed the understanding dwells in you; in me (it is) as though the power were preg-
nant. For I when conceived from the fountain that flowed to me, I gave birth)
My father, you have spoken every word well to me. But I am amazed at this state-
ment that you have just made. For you said “The power is in me”
He said, “I gave birth to it (the power), as children are born.
Then my father, I have many brothers, if I am to be numbered among the offspring.
Right, my son! [...]. (NHH. VI-6 52, 6-7).
Furthermore, it follows a prayer with Hermes, Tat, and Tat’s spiritual brothers.
My father, begin the discourse on the eighth and the ninth, and include me also with
my brothers.
4
For a specific case study on Poimandres, See: J. Büchli, Der Poimandres, ein paganisiertes Evan-
gelium. (Tübingen: 1987).
5
The collection of books contains religious and Hermetic texts, works of moral maxims, Apocryphal
texts, and a rewriting of Plato’s Republic.
6
Reizenstein held that Hermetists could have lived in Gnostic-like “Hermetic communities”, while
Festugière was against such theory See: R. Reitzenstein, Poimandres - Studien zur griechisch-ägyptischen und
frühchristlichen Literatur, (Leipzig: 1904), p. 248. Festugière`s argument against that theory: A.-J. Festugière,
La Révélation d`Hermès Trismégiste I. (Paris: 1944), pp.81-4.
7
See: M. Krause, “Der Stand der Veröffentlichung der Nag Hammadi-Texte”. In: U. Bianchi (ed.),
Le Originni dello Gnosticismo – Colloquio di Messina, 13-18 Aprile 1966. (Leiden: 1967), pp.87. “Lasst uns
einander küssen (Ωspåzesuai).” This ceremonial kiss and prayer are repeated in Codex VI-7, 65 3f. See also:
J. Holzhausen, Das Corpus Hermeticum-Deutsch II. (Stuttgart- Bad Cannstatt:: 1997), pp.518; and J. M. Robin-
son (ed.) The Nag Hammadi Library. (New York: 1990). This ceremonial kiss is repeated in VI-7, 65, 5 and
note that both in Robinson’s and Holzhausen’s text, the translation for Ωspåzesuai is to embrace / umar-
men, instead of to kiss.
Let us pray, my son, to the father of the universe, with your brothers who are my sons,
that he may give the spirit of eloquence. (NHH. VI-6 53, 25-31).
There is a passage on holy aliments that were “without blood” and that concerned
a ceremonial banquet:
When they said these things in the prayer, they embraced each other and they went
to eat their holy food, which no blood in it. (NHH. VI-7, 5-7).8
8
M. Krause op.cit., p. 80, excerpt from Codex VI-7, 65 5-7: “Als sie das gesagt hatten, indem sie be-
teten, küssten sie einander und gingen, um ihre heilige Nahrung zu essen, in der kein Blut ist.” Note that
vegetarianism was also a norm of Pythagorean communities, and that blood in aliments was also part
of a social-religious taboo in Judaism. See also: J. Holzhausen, Das Corpus Hermeticum-Deutsch II. (Stuttgart-
Bad Cannstatt: 1997), p. 537; and: K. –W. Tröger, Mysterienglaube und Gnosis in Corpus Hermeticum XIII.
(Berlin: 1971), pp. 121, 133-4.
9
G. Quispel: “The Asclepius”. In : R. Van den Broek, W.J.Hanegraaff, W.J, Gnosis and Hermeticism,
(New York: 1998), p. 74.
grew in popularity among slaves and poor segments of the population and faced
many periods of political persecution. However, in just few centuries it was already
consolidated as the official religion of the Roman Empire, and also of its neighbours
Ethiopia and Armenia.10 Such rapid growth produced diversity in the interpretations
of this religion. Therefore, it was necessary to develop some epistemology to codify
the beliefs and also to promote a unified position against rivals such the pagan reli-
gions and Christian divergent sects – or heretics.11 This process of codification was
deeply based in the debate between Christian ideology and philosophic systems,
whose authors were not necessarily exclusive Christians, but could be interpreted in
a favourable sense.
Origen (2nd/3rd centuries A.D) and Augustine of Hippo (4th/5th centuries A.D) are
good examples of this “Christian intellectual war” on paganism and heresies.12 On
the other hand, Porphyry of Tyre in Contra Christianos criticizes Origen’s appropri-
ation of Greek allegorical methods of interpretation to explain the Jewish scriptures.13
Indeed, in the late 4th century A.D Emperor Julian - called “the Apostate” by Chris-
tians - attempted to remove some of the power of the Christian schools, which, dur-
ing this time and following time periods, used ancient Greek literature in their
teachings, in an effort to present the Christian religion as superior to paganism.14 We
know that Tertullian, Cyrill and Augustin were reading Hermetic texts, collections
and/or anthologies. They rejected its Paganism, but noted that similarities could be
found within their theology. The early Christian Fathers went as far as to quote the
Hermetic texts in their campaign against heresies.
a) The true Gnosis came from God alone and cannot be taught:
In his tractate against Gnostics (early 3rd century A.D), Tertullian called
“Mercurius Trismegistus”, the father of all natural sciences/ occultism15. In his work
de Anima he declared that true knowledge cannot be taught, but can only be given
by God:
10
See: J. L. González, The Story of Christianity: Vol. 1: The Early Church to the Reformation. (San Fran-
cisco: 1984).
11
In fact, the heresies were deemed as the greatest threat to Christianism, since different Christian
sects promoted independent efforts of evangelization (especially among the belligerent Germanic tribes),
spreading their heresies and the ideological conflict.
12
Against the popular cults of Isis, Mithra and Cybele, see Augustin’s City of God VII, 23-26.
13
Cf. Porphyry, Contra Christianos, Frag. 39.
14
See: G.W. Bowersock, Julian the Apostate. (London: 1978), and W. Hamilton (ed. and transl.), Am-
mianus Marcellinus, The Later Roman Empire (A.D. 354-378). (New York: 1986).
15
Adversus Valentinianos XV, 1. On the matter of “magister omnium physicorum”, see comments in : J.
–C. Fredouille (transl.) Tertullien: Contra les Valentiniens. Tome II (Paris: 1980), pp. 280-1. It is not very clear
if physicorum is used here as an allusion to the wisdom of nature of the world hence physicus would be
used in the ancient sense of fysikøq - , or if it was connected to the Hellenistic sense of expertise in
occultism. In fact, both interpretations fit with the general knowledge concerning Hermes Trismegistos.
Of course we shall not deny that philosophers have sometimes thought the same
things as ourselves. The testimony of truth is the issue thereof. [...] In nature, howe-
ver, most conclusions are suggested, as it were, by that common intelligence where-
with God has been pleased to endow the soul of man. This intelligence has been
caught up by philosophy, and, with the view of glorifying her own art, has been in-
flated (it is not to be wondered at that I use this language) with straining after that
facility of language which is practised in the building up and pulling down of eve-
rything, and which has greater aptitude for persuading men by speaking than by tea-
ching. [...]She thought, no doubt, that she was deriving her mysteries from sacred
sources, as men deem them, because in ancient times most authors were supposed
to be (I will not say godlike, but) actually gods: as, for instance, the Egyptian Mer-
cury, to whom Plato 16 paid very great deference; [...]. (De Anima II, 1-3).
For Hermes also said that the heart is responsible for discerning God.17
Look up with the eyes of the heart [...]. Then seek a guide to take you by the hand
and lead you to the portals of knowledge. [...] All are sober and gaze with the heart
toward one who wishes to be seen, who is neither heard nor spoken of, who is seen
not with the eyes but with mind and heart. (CH. VII, 1-3).
16
Cf. Phaedrus C. LIX; Augustin City of God VIII,11; Euseb. Praep. Evang. IX, 3.
17
The spiritual role played by the heart was already shown in the Egyptian history. However, it must
be clear that to Graeco-Roman general knowledge, the Hermetic doctrine was indeed the translation of
pure Egyptian traditions.
18
In Corpus Hermeticum IV, 8, reincarnation is mentioned as being necessary to the process of allowing
Man to achieve the perfection of his soul.
19
On the other hand, the Neo-Platonist and Christian apologist Origen believed in the pre-existence
of Soul. Cf.: De Principiis I. 2,10; I. 7,4; II. 9, 1.
What, then, by this time means that ancient saying, mentioned by Plato, concerning
the reciprocal migration of souls; how they remove hence and go thither, and then
return hither and pass through life, and then again depart from this life, and after-
wards become alive from the dead? Some will have it that this is a saying of Pytha-
goras; Albinus supposes it to be a divine announcement, perhaps of the Egyptian
Mercury. (De Anima XXVIII, 1).
Tertullian’s account of the destiny of the human soul after death is quoted directly
from the Corpus Hermeticum:
I must here also remark, that if souls undergo a transformation, they will actually not
be able to accomplish and experience the destinies which they shall deserve; and the
aim and purpose of judicial recompense will be brought to nought, as there will be
wanting the sense and consciousness of merit and retribution. And there must be this
want of consciousness, if souls lose their condition; and there must ensue this loss, if
they do not continue in one stay. But even if they should have permanency enough
to remain unchanged until the judgment,—a point which Mercurius Aegyptius re-
cognised, when he said that the soul, after its separation from the body, was not dis-
sipated back into the soul of the universe, but retained permanently its distinct indi-
viduality, “in order that it might render,” to use his own words, “an account to the
Father of those things which it has done in the body;”— (even supposing all this, I
say,) I still want to examine the justice, the solemnity, the majesty, and the dignity of
this reputed judgment of God, and see whether human judgment has not too eleva-
ted a throne in it—exaggerated in both directions, in its office both of punishments
and rewards, too severe in dealing out its vengeance, and too lavish in bestowing its
favour. (De Anima XXXIII, 2).
[...]The gods sowed the generation of humans to know the works of God; to be a wor-
king witness to nature; to increase the number of mankind; to master all things under
heaven; to discern the things that are good; [...] and through the wonder-working of
the cycling gods they created every soul incarnate to contemplate heaven, the course
of the heavenly gods, the works of God and the working of nature; [...].” (CH. III, 3).
In fact, through his knowledge of the philosophic aspects of the Hermetic doc-
trine, Tertullian demonstrated that Christian Hermetists were also debating this doc-
trine to the point of producing direct quotations in their texts, as well as agreements
and disagreements on subjects presented by Hermetic literature. Accepting and re-
fusing aspects of the Hermetic (and other) doctrine is enough to establish that such
literature took part in Christian intellectual digressions during the construction of a
“Christian system of belief”.
Hermetic texts were also inspiration for the Patristica Graeca. Hermetic dis-
courses were also present in the arguments of Cyrill of Alexandria, who wrote a pos-
tumous response to Emperor Julian’s tractate against Christians in the 5th century
A.D. In his antithesis: “Contra Iulianum”, Cyrill considers the Hermetic texts – here
called the “Hermaic Books” (Erma›kÅ) - a legacy of a wise human being who was
deified by Egyptians in posterior generations.
Pour en venir aux comparisons, n’entends-tu pas dire que notre compatriot Hermès
a divisé l’ensemble de l’Égypte en parts et en lots, mesurant au cordeau les terresa-
rables ? Qu’il a tracé des fossés en vue de l’inrrigation, a institué les districts territo-
riaux et donné des noms d’après ces districts ? Qu’il a mis en forme les stipulations
contractuelles ? (…) Qu’enfin il a imaginé les nombres, le calcul, la géométrie, l’as-
tronomie, l’astrologie, les arts, la gramaire, et les a transmis ? (Contra Julianum, I, 548
B-C).20
Following the same observations as that of Clement and Tertullian, Cyril links
Hermes to natural (numbers, astronomy) and supernatural (astrology) brands of
knowledge.
On the subject of the creative divine Verb, he also quoted Hermes three times by
saying, firstly:
Hermès Trismégiste parle ainsi de Dieu: “Son Verbe (Logos), procédant de lui, par-
fait, fécond et créateur, tomba avec sa nature féconde sur l’eau déconde et rendit l’eau
prégnante [...] Et du même, dans une autre passage: “C’est donc la pyramide qui sert
de fondement à la Nature et au monde spirituel, car elle a au-dessus d’elle, qui la do-
mine, le Verbe créateur du Maître de toutes choses, [...]. (Contra Julianum, I, 552 D).
The Logos of God creating the world is debated in CH. IV. It is interesting to note
that Hermes adopted a bowl full of Nous as a metaphor and shared it only with those
special souls of men who had faith.
He (God) filled a great mixing bowl (Krat∂ra m™gan) with it (Noyq), appointing a
herald whom he commanded to make the following proclamation to human hearts:
“Immerse yourself in the mixing bowl (Båptison seaytÓ ¸ dynam™n e˝q to†ton tØn
krat∂ra) if your heart has the strength, if it believes you will rise up again to the one
who sent the mixing bowl bellow, if it recognizes the purpose of your coming to be.”
[...]. (CH. IV, 4).
20
P. Burgière, P. Évieux (transl.) Cyrille d’Alexandrie Contre Julien - vol.1. (Paris: 1985). The authors com-
ment in p. 188, that this text is not part of the known Corpus Hermeticum. It is possible according to
Burgière-Évieux that Cyrill was using some lost apologetic Hermetic text.
The second reference to the Hermetic doctrine concerning the divine Logos/Verb
comes from an unknown fragment of a dialogue between Hermes and Agathos Dai-
mon:
Le même Hermès, à la question d’un desservant de sanctuaire égyptien qui lui de-
mande: “Pourquoi, Très grand Bon Génie (¿ m™giste ΩgatØq daºmvn), le Verbe a-t-il été
appelé de ce nom par le Seigneur de l’univers?”, répond ainsi : “Je te l’ai dejà dit à
une précédente occasion, mais tu n’as pas compris. La nature du Verbe spirituel de
Dieu est une nature générative et créatrice. (Contra Julianum, I, 553 B).
Then, Cyrill mentioned another Hermetic tractate aiming to explain the Chris-
tian description of God as the Father:
Hermès encore, au livre I de son Commentaire détaillé à Tat, parle ainsi de Dieu : “Le
Verbe du Créateur, mon enfant, est éternel, se meut lui-même, est insensible à la crois-
sance, à la diminution, au changement, à la corruption; unique, il est tourjours sem-
blable à lui-même, égal, uniforme, stable, ordonné, seul à exister après le Dieu conçu
comme primordial. ” Et par cette expression, il désigne, je crois, le Père. (Contra Ju-
lianum, I, 553 A).
Cyrill followed Hermes’ arguments in order to explain how impossible it was for
a human being to describe or even to understand God:
Hermès Trismégiste s’exprime à peu près comme suit: “Concevoir Dieu est difficile,
l’exprimer est impossible, même pour qui peut le concevoir : c’est en effect la tra-
dutction de l’incorporel par du corporel qui est impossible, comme l’est aussi la com-
préhension du parfait par l’imparfait [...] Et Hermès ajoute ailleurs : “Ne prétends plus
jamais, en songeant à cet être unique, à ce seul Bien, que rien lui soit impossible : la
totalité de la puissance, c’est lui. [...].” (Contra Julianum, I, 549 B-C ; 552 D).
In Corpus Hermeticum Hermes explains to Tat that prayer is the only possible way
to feel the presence of God:
You, then, Tat, my child, pray first to the Lord, the Father, the Father, the only, who
is not but from whom the one comes; ask him the grace to enable you to understand
so great a god, to permit even one rai of his to illuminate your thinking. Only un-
derstanding, because it, too, is invisible, sees the invisible, and if you have the
strength, Tat, your mind’s eye will see it. (CH. V, 2).
This is the god who is greater than any name; this is the god invisible and entirely vi-
sible. This god who is evident to the eyes may be seen in the mind. He is bodiless and
many-bodied; or, rather, He is all-bodied. There is nothing that he is not, for he also
is all that is, and this is why he has all names, because they are of one father, and this
is why He has no name, because he is the father of all. (CH.V, 10).
Indeed, Cyrill quoted the description of God as eternal Logos, the Supreme
Good and Father of all, as given also by Corpus Hermeticum, I, 18-19; II, 14-17. Con-
cerning the perception of God by humans, Cyrill observed that it was not possible
to directly perceive God using sensorial faculties and used Hermetic texts to reinforce
his beliefs once more:
J’ajouterai à cette citation ce qu’a jadis écrit Hermés Trismégiste A son esprit (‘PrØq
tØn „ayto† No†n ’) (c’est là titre du livre) : “Ainsi donc, dis-tu, Dieu est invisible? Trêve
de blasphèmes! Qui plus que lui est visible? S’il a créé, c’est pour qu’on le voie à tra-
vers toute chose. L’excellence de Dieu, sa vertu, c’est de se manifester à travers toute
chose !” (Contra Julianum, II, 580 B).
He again returns to this subject and call Hermes as a witness to his argument that
the act of creating was, in fact, part of God’s nature:
Voici en effect ce qu’écrit A Asklèpius celui qu’on appelle Hermès Trismégiste, par-
lant de la nature du Tout : S’il est vrai qu’on admet deux êtres, celui qui naît et celui
qui crée, l’unité fond en un seul celui qui précède et celui qui suit ; or celui qui pré-
cède, c’est le Dieu créateur, et celui qui suit c’est l’être qui naît, quel qu’il soit. [...] La
gloire indivisible de Dieu est de créer toute chose, et le pouvoir créateur est comme
le corps de Dieu. [...]” Plus loin, Hermès parle en termes plus chaleureux, en appor-
tant un example manifeste: “Ainsi donc, il est permis à un même peintre de repré-
senter le ciel, la terre, la mer, des dieux, des hommes toute sorte d’êtres privés de rai-
son et d’âme, et Dieu est incapable de créer tout ce qui existe ? Ô comble de stupi-
dité, profonde ignorance de ce qui touche Dieu! [...].” (Contra Julianum, II, 600 A-B).
Such debate regarding the definition of God is present in the following texts: Cor-
pus Hermeticum: CH. I, 21; II 5-12, God as the Supreme good in II, 14-16 and VI; on
the possibility of a man learning on God, CH. III, 3; V, 2-6; The impossibility of de-
scribing God is present as subject in: CH I, 30, IX, 1-6. In ad Asclepius God is a widely
debated as subject in 8-22.
21
A. -J. Festugière, op.cit.
22
G. Fowden, op.cit.
pose the idea that the Christian perception of the Hermetic phenomenon was indeed
dual in its nature. It has been demonstrated through examples how the Christian doc-
trine was compatible with the hermetic cosmogony. In addition, it has been made
clear just how prepared the early Christian Fathers were for debating and compar-
ing Christianism and Hermetism. However, such disposition in dialogue with the
theological and philosophical dimensions of the Hermetic literature vanishes when
subjects concerning magic and the other occult wisdoms are added to the discourse.
Tertullian generally defined all magic, oracles, spirit evocations, and magicians
as essentially evil:
What after this shall we say about magic? [...]it is an imposture. But it is not we Chris-
tians only whose notice this system of imposture does not escape. We, it is true, have
discovered these spirits of evil, not, to be sure, by a complicity with them, but by a
certain knowledge which is hostile to them; nor is it by any procedure which is at-
tractive to them, but by a power which subjugates them that we handle (their wret-
ched system) - that manifold pest of the mind of man, that artificer of all error, that
destroyer of our salvation and our soul at one swoop. In this way, even by magic,
which is indeed only a second idolatry, wherein they pretend that after death they
become demons, just as they were supposed in the first and literal idolatry to become
gods (and why not? since the gods are but dead things), [...]. So also in that other kind
of magic, which is supposed to bring up from Hades the souls now resting there, and
to exhibit them to public view, there is no other expedient of imposture ever resor-
ted to which operates more powerfully. Of course, why a phantom becomes visible,
is because a body is also attached to it; and it is no difficult matter to delude the ex-
ternal vision of a man whose mental eye it is so easy to blind. The serpents which
emerged from the magicians’ rods, certainly appeared to Pharaoh and to the Egyp-
tians as bodily substances. (De Anima, LVII).
Note that Tertullian is not denouncing magic as a lie. He condemned its adop-
tion as a fake system, by accusing it of being product of demoniac activity. This neg-
ative impression of magic led Lactantius to call Hermes Trismegistos “Lord of De-
mons” (daimoniårxhq).23 In fact, Christian literature reproduced the stereotype rep-
resenting magicians as compulsory deceivers and natural antagonists of the Chris-
tian faith, represented by saints and apostles.24 However, Tertullian delimited the ex-
istence of good magic as Christian miracle, for when Christians managed to summon
spirits of the dead it is God and not demons who are operating the miracle:
The power of God has, no doubt, sometimes recalled men’s souls to their bodies, as
a proof of His own transcendent rights; but there must never be, because of this fact,
any agreement supposed to be possible between the divine faith and the arrogant pre-
tensions of sorcerers, and the imposture of dreams, and the licence of poets. But yet
in all cases of a true resurrection, when the power of God recalls souls to their bodies,
either by the agency of prophets, or of Christ, or of apostles, a complete presumption
is afforded us, by the solid, palpable, and ascertained reality (of the revived body),
23
Lact. Div. Inst. II 14,6. In: J. Holzhausen, Das Corpus Hermeticum-Deutsch II. (Stuttgart- Bad Cannstatt:
1997), p. 575.
24
There are too many examples. For cases described in the New Testament: Simon, the nemesis of
Peter, in: Acts VIII, 9-25; And for Elymas, the rival of Paul, in: Acts XIII, 8-12.
that its true form must be such as to compel one’s belief of the fraudulence of every
incorporeal apparition of dead persons. (De Anima, LVII).
[...] regarding the one, true God, the creator of the world, he (i.e. Hermes) indeed says
much that corresponds with the truth. (City of God, VIII, 23).26
25
See: P. Veyne, Les Grecs ont-ils cru à leurs mythes? (Paris: 1992). The author explains how the Chris-
tians claimed that it was possible to convince people of their views by convincing people to trust them.
Furthermore, there was indeed a war for knowledge between Christians and Pagans, hence the interest
in assuring in the discourse that only Christians were able to produce true knowledge. Cicero debated the
idea of religion to be nothing more than political fiction, aiming to promote social order and respect for
a specific institutional autorithy in De Natura Deorum.
26
D. S. Wiesen (transl.) Augustin : City of God - Loeb Classical Library - Book III (London: 1968).
erence. Magic was very popular in the pagan milieu, especially regarding love
charms, divine protection, avenging human enemies and necromancy. According to
Pinch:
Most surviving Egyptian magic is concerned with protection or healing. In the
Graeco-Egyptian papyri, magic is often motivated by the desire for sexual pleasure,
financial gain and social success.27
27
G. Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt. (London: 1994), p. 163.
28
As in the case of Apollonius of Tyana, who was deemed a holy man and produced miracles with
the same greatness of those the Christians claimed that Christ did. See: K. Seligmann, The History of Magic.
(Ner York: 1948), pp.87-8.
29
W. C. Wright (transl.) The Works of Emperor Julian, v.I. (London: 1961).
30
“External” in the sense of not belonging to the axis Greek’s – Egyptian’s symbolic referential sym-
bolic universes.
31
Op.cit, p. 68.
32
See: G. Fowden, op. cit, pp. 36-7; and B. A. Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity.
(Minneapolis: 1990).
In his work De Mysteriis Aegyptorum33, written between late third century and ear-
ly 4 century A.D, the Syrian Neo-Platonist/Neo-Pythagorean Iamblichus established
th
a particular conception of magic by which the human soul could achieve salvation
through rituals aimed at contact with gods. Iamblichus based his explanation on the
divine aspect of his so-called theurgy (lit. the work of gods, normally translated as
a synonym for magical practices) in the hermetical principle of Man’s dual nature.
As a result, his perception of the occult arts connected them as a complementary
mechanism which aimed for the perfection of souls. Using Egypt as a reference for
his system, Iamblichus followed the idea that Hermetism did parallel many aspects
of Egyptian tradition, reproducing some degree of “Egyptomania” that existed in the
Graeco-Roman mentality.
a) On Theurgy
In his work, Iamblichus reproduced the old formula of claiming an Egyptian priest
(Abammon) for the authorship of his work.34 In fact, this tendency to relate Egypt to
occult and fantastic wisdom remained a part of late Graeco-Roman imagery. In this
sense, Hermetic occultism and philosophical principles were commonly portrayed
as having had Egyptian origins. Iamblichus nonetheless made it clear that theurgy
was a distinct and sacred process.
Si donc l’ascension obtenue par les invocations procure aux prêtres purification des
passions, affranchissement du monde créé, union au principe divin, comment dire
qu’elle implique une passibillité? Car il n’est pas vrai que cette sorte d’invocation at-
tire de force les dieux impassibles et purs vers le passible et l’impur ; au contraire,
elle fait de nous, qui en raison de la génération sommes nés passibles, des êtres purs
et immuables. (De Mysteriis Aegyptiorum I, 12).
Indeed, theurgy was magic. The difference pointed out by Iamblichus was based
on the premise that magic was essentially egotistically motivated, for it served human
passions: desires, fears, ambitions, etc. On the other hand, the major objective of Theur-
gy was the spiritual improvement.35 In that sense, Theurgy was the proposal of a “moral
code” with regards to handling magic rather than an entirely new branch of magic.
Le bien en soi, ils (les Égyptiens) croient que c’est, s’il divin, le dieu qui transcende
la pensée ; s’il est humain, l’union à ce dieu, comme Bitys36 l’a traduit des livres her-
métiques. Cette partie n’a donc pas été, comme tu le supposes, “négligée par les Égyp-
tien”, mais divinement transmise; et ce n’est pas d’“objects futiles que les théurges
accablent l’intellect divin”, mais de ce qui se rapporte à la purification de l’âme [...].
(De Mysteriis Aegyptiorum X, 7).
33
This title is an invention of Marcilio Ficino.
34
Cf. the headlines of De Mysteriis Aegyptiorum.
35
See: G. Luch “Theurgy and Forms of Worship.” In: J. Neusner et alii, Religion, Science and Magic.
(Oxford: 1989), pp. 185-228. See also G. Shaw, Theurgy and the Soul: The Neo-Platonism of Iamblichus.
(Pennsylvania: 1995).
36
The Egyptian priest and Hermetist Bitys is presented by Iamblichus as being responsible for pre-
senting King Ammon with the Hermetic texts (De Myst. VIII, 5). Fowden, op.cit, p. 150, n.34, believes that
the frequent references to a certain Pitys in PGM IV might be a reference to him.
Ceux (écrits) qui circulent sous le nom d’Hermès contiennent des opinions herméti-
ques, bien que souvent ils s’expriment dans la langue des philosophes; car ils on été
traduits de l’égyptien par des hommes qui n’étaient pas sans connaître la philosop-
hie. (De Mysteriis Aegyptiorum VIII, 4).
The very quality of the speech and the <sound> of Egyptian words have in themsel-
ves the energy of objects they speak of. (CH. XVI, 1).
This passage is also subject of debate in the second chapter of this study, but in
a different context of argumentation. However, Iamblichus had a different inter-
pretation of this same passage and used it to support the idea that Egyptian sounds
should be preserved in order to preserve their magical virtues. His interpretations
may be a consequence of two different dimensions of ideologic appropriation:
First, an unpredictable and expontaneous cultural dialogue with the source. For
Iamblichus it would be culturally unfathomable to consider any kind of criticism of
the efficiency of philosophy as a system of intellectual digression/instruction. It was
part of all Hellenized symbolic systems that the ‘truth’ was that philosophy was the
only civilized way of intellectual expression. Therefore Iamblichus and his other Hel-
lenistic contemporaries would be ‘symbolically blind’ to any such possibility. Another
possibility is a subordination of the text to its receptor’s social-political expectations:
Iamblichus could not accept the possibility of Hermetic criticism of philosophy
since he was proposing a philosophic system. Since he consistently based a part of
his system on “translated Egyptian tradition”, it would be illogical to promote an in-
terpretation in which his main source of symbolic legitimacy disagreed with his ideas
regarding the efficacy of philosophy.
What is exposed in Iamblichus’ “The Mysteriis” is that Egyptian sounds were be-
lieved to have had magical virtues, and therefore, they should be “symbolically pre-
served” at least as voces magicae. Indeed, the so-called Greek Magical Papyri have
plenty of examples of how Greek spells recurred to the expedient of voces magicae37
in order to transcribe Egyptian Demotic sacred names, and fulfil evocations.
Charm that produces a direct vision: Prayer for divine alliance, which you are to say
first toward the sunrise, then the same first prayer is to be spoken to a lamp. [...]
Hymn: Hail, serpent, and stout lion, natural sorces of fire./ And hail, clear water and
lofty-leafed tree,/ and you who gather up clover from golden fields of beans, and who
cause gentle foam to gush forth from pure mouths. [...] I pray because your mystic
symbols I declare, hv ai oy amerr ooyvu . iy›vh . Marmaray√u . La›lam . soymarta . Be
gracious unto me, first-father, and may you yourself sent strength as my companion.
[...]. (PGM. IV, 930-949).38
Note that in the Hermetic tractate The Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth, voces mag-
icae are also evoked twice by Tat in his calling for the angels of the eighth and ninth
spheres:
He is perfect, the invisible God to whom one speaks in silence – his image is moved
when it is directed, and it governs – the one mighty power, who is exalted above ma-
jesty, who is better than honoured (ones), Zoxauazo A VV EE VVV HHH VVVV HH
VVVVVV OOOOO VVVVVV YYYYYY VVVVVVVVVVVV VVV Zozazou . (NHH. VI-6,
56,10-20).39
37
It is the transcription and glossing alphabetically secret magic names. For a study on Greek and
Demotic Magical Papyri, see: J. Dieleman. Priests, Tongues, and Rites. (Leiden/Boston: 2005).
38
H.D. Betz (ed.). The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation. (Chicago, London: 2004), pp.56-7. Betz (p.
56, n.126) identifies this spell as a Greek equivalent to the Demotic spell called: ph. -n-tr (god’s arrival).
39
The names Zoxauazo and Zozazou can also be found in PGM XIII 138, 213. Zoxathaz can be a com-
bination of Life (zv¸) and Death (uånatoq). See: J. Holzhausen, op.cit, p. 521, n.57. Holzhausen observes con-
nection of the seven Greek vocals with their seven known planets. See: J. –P. Mahé, Hermès en Haute-Égypte,
I. (Québec: 1978), p.73.
40
op.cit, p. 163.
41
As in the attacks of Augustin in City of God X, 9-11. Augustin condemned all kinds of magic and
classified incantantions, charms, necromancy (goetia) and theurgy as demonolatry. He addressed these
chapters against Platonists like Porphyry who insisted in the divine aspects of theurgy.
Et ceux par lesquels certains ridiculisent comme vagabonds et charlatans les fidèles
des dieux, [...] ceux-là non plus n’atteignent pas la vraie théologie et la vraie théur-
gie. (De Mysteriis Aegyptiorum X, 3).
His theurgy proposed a way to form a relationship with magic. From this per-
spective, the use of magic was acceptable and necessary in the process of learning
about God.
b) On Astrology
42
For a complete analysis of the development of Astronomy in a comparative approach on Babylo-
nians, Egyptians, Persians including Indian and Hellenistic sources, see: B. L. van der Waerden, Anfänge
der Astronomie (Groningen: 1956). For a study on Egyptian astrology and the Graeco-Roman milieu, see:
J. Dieleman, “Claiming the Stars – Egyptian Priests Facing the Sky.” In: S. Bickel, A. Loprieno (eds.) AH
17 (Basel: 2003), pp. 277-289. See also: O. Neugebauer, R. A. Parker, Egyptian astronomical Texts 3vols. (Lon-
don: 1969).
43
See: G. Pinch, op.cit, p. 169, and J. Dieleman, AH 17, p. 277-89.
44
Matthew II, 1-13.
45
That depends of the translation. “Wise men” in English, like “Weisen” in German. “Mages” in
French, “magos” in Spanish and Portuguese, “µάγοι” in Greek.
46
As exposed in CH. I, 15, and already explained in the second chapter of this study.
47
“Control” in the sense of not being reduced to a passive beholder of Fate’s actions. For a well trained
astrologer it was possible to change one’s fate through foreknowledge.
48
The Hermetic relation with Fate is explained in chapter 2.2.1, II-b of this study.
Ils (les Égyptiens) distinguent de la nature la vie psychique et la vie intellectuelle, non
seulement à propos de l’univers mais dans notre cas: mettant au-dessus intelect et rai-
son comme étant à part soi, ils leur font oevrer les êtres du devenir; [...]. (De Myste-
riis Aegyptiorum VIII, 4).
As in the Hermetic doctrine, Man also has a dual Logos49, which could be used
as intellectual virtue, in order to prosper over the material world and as spiritual
virtue, in order to assure him of the possibility of transcending back to God’s side.
Concerning the Hermetic Astrology, Iamblichus observed that the dual nature of Man
leaves him under the rule of Fate as long as he lived in his material form.
La plupart des Égyptiens font dépendre notre libre arbiter du movement des as-
ters.”Ce qu’il en est, il faut te l’expliquer plus longuement, en recourant aux con-
ceptions hermétiques. D’après ces écrits, l’homme a deux âmes : l’une issue du Pre-
mier Intelligible, qui participe aussi à la puissance du démiurge ; l’autre introduite
en nous à partir de la révolution des corps célestes; c’est en celle-ci que se glisse l’âme
qui voit Dieu. (De Mysteriis Aegyptiorum VIII, 6).
In that sense, Iamblichus proposed that in order to free oneself of Fate, it was nec-
essary to become divine, by seeking God and avoiding all evildoings. That process
demanded a dual effort. One side was the moral/spiritual purification...
Je pronounce donc que l’homme conçu comme divinise, uni auparavant à la con-
templation des dieux, s’est glissé dans une âme combinée à la forme spéecifiquement
humaine et par là trouvé pris aux liens de la nécessité et de la fatalité. Il faut donc exa-
miner comment il se délie et sáffranchit de ces liens. Or, il n’est pas d’autre moyen
que la connaissance des dieux : l’essence du bonheur, en effect, c’est d’avoir la science
du bien, comme l’essence du mal consiste dans l’oubli du bien et l’illusion au sujet
du mal ; [...].” (De Mysteriis Aegyptiorum X, 5).
... and the other side was intellectual, through the magical development of chan-
nels to the gods. Iamblichus explained that the union with the gods, or theurgy pro-
duced the spiritual purification and allowed man to triumph over Fate:
Thus, astrology was a method of combining the intellectual and spiritual apti-
tudes (the double-essential Hermetic Logos), which composed human nature.
Iamblichus claimed that – in agreement with his contemporaries’ general knowledge
on this subject – that it was a part of Egypt’s tradition. His perception was that as-
49
The Hermetic Logos and its duality are explained in CH. XII, 14. With regards to the transcendence
of Man due to his Nous, it is the subject of CH. XII,1. See also tables 10 a/b of this study.
trology aimed to predict or influence human affairs by understanding how the di-
vine will operated through Fate. This understanding was a demonstration of how
one’s intellect could help one’s soul in the task of self-purification.
Syrian pagans from Harran were [...] star-worshippers and diligent astrologers. These
Sabians, as the Arabs called them, possessed exceptional skills as linguists, and the
ease with which they acquired Arabic recommended them to the courts at Baghdad
[...].55
Sabian, then, is a synonym for gnostic. Given this definition, the stories found in cer-
tain Muslim authors connecting Sabian beliefs with those of the Egyptians, the refe-
rences to Hermes, Enos, Seth and the Agathodaimon, the supposed pilgrimages of
Sabians to the pyramids and the secret rituals and prayers would all make sense in
the context of this definition of Sabian.56
However, from 830 A.D on, the term was used specifically to refer to Harran. Ac-
cording to Scott, they claimed to be Sabians in order to escape persecution57, and de-
50
In the vicinities of Edessa, in modern Turkey.
51
J. Assmann, Moses the Egyptian. (London: 1997), p.57.
52
H. J. W. “Bardaisan of Edessa and the Hermetica: The Aramaic Philosopher and the Philosophy
of his time”, in: JEOL, 21, 1970, pp.190-210.
53
Ibidem. Bar Daysan of Edessa was one of the most important links in the chain of transmission of
Hermetism to the Near East.
54
See: T. M. Green, The City of the Moon God: Religious Traditions of Harran. (Leiden: 1992), p.168.
55
E. J. Holmyard, Alchemy, (Dover, New York: 1990), p.68.
56
Ibidem, p.110.
57
For the Koran (2: 59; 5:73; 22:17) proclaimed that Jews, Christians and Sabians were believers and
therefore are protected by the Law. However, regardless of this, they were obligated to convert in 1050
A.D.
clared that the Hermetic books were their sacred writings.58 Hermetism persisted as
a living tradition in the city of Haran in Syria as late as the tenth century, when its
leading exponent, Thabit ibn Qurra (835-901A.D), established a pagan Hermetic
school in Baghdad.59 Prominent Muslim philosophers as al-Kindi, al-Farabi, Ibn
Sina (Avicenna), and others were influenced by Hellenistic Hermetic writings.60
Therefore, cases like the pagan-Gnostic tradition of Harran and the so-called Tech-
nical Hermetica were, in fact, Philosophical. Furthermore, such perceptions were as-
similated and reproduced by the Islamic thought, following a radically opposite view
of the Hermetic phenomenon that was developed by Christians.
Conclusion
In late antiquity, different social groups representing different thoughts and ide-
ologies were in constant dispute while they imposed and defended their respective
ways of life. Christians struggled to conquer new adepts by destroying the credibil-
ity of Paganism. The others struggled to maintain the strength of their symbolic uni-
verses, and attacked Christian’s aspirations of hegemony over the Roman Empire.
In this context, the intellectual debate promoting the codification of the Christian doc-
trine was also a method of criticizing all rival doctrines. In this sense, the meaning
of a text is not merely found inside it, but is also built through an active social process,
since it is ideological. The texts can be used in an “ideological” sense, since social dis-
courses promote identities, exclusions, orientations and behaviours. What determines
the ideological or political usage of a social discourse is the external context of the
social process in which it is inserted.
As social groups, Christians, Pagans and Gnostics used a vast supply of litera-
ture in order to offer justification and legitimacy to their beliefs and behaviours, the
Hermetic literature was part of this process. There was not a canonical interpretation,
nor a “right way” of using the Hermetic texts, since the uses are culturally established
by different social groups. They could be used equally as part of a theological dis-
course, philosophical debate, and erudite curiosity. In fact, the “usage” of Hermetic
texts was by no means restrained to “Hermetic esoteric-like circles” – if one existed.
Christian Gnostics used them in Nag Hammadi, Christian apologists assimilated
them in their discourses and Pagan Philosophers debated them and used them as
premises in their own systems. Therefore, each social group had different interests,
strategies, and interpretations of the Hermetica. Furthermore, at one time these in-
terpretations could be contradictory among the groups. Consequently, the difference
of interpretations produced different “truths” concerning the Hermetica. Each
“truth” was reproduced as part of the respective social group’s symbolic universe.
58
W. Scott (ed., Transl.) Hermetica: The Ancient Greek and Latin Writings Which Contain Religious or Philo-
sophic Teachings Ascribed to Hermes Trismegistus. (Oxford: 1929), pp. 97-108.
59
See: A. E. Affifi, “The Influence of Hermetic Literature on Moslem Thought.” In: Bulletin of the School
of Oriental and African Studies 13/4, (Cambridge: 1951), p. 844, and D. Merkur, Gnosis: An Esoteric Tradi-
tion of Mystical Visions and Unions. (New York: 1991), p. 20-1. W. Scott, op.cit, pp. 103-5 mentions a book
from ibn Qurra called De Religionen Sabianorum.
60
See: A. E. Affifi, op.cit., and Ch. Genequand, “Platonism and Hermetism in al-Kindi’s Fi al-Nafs.”
In: Zeitschrift für Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften 4 (Frankfurt: 1987-8), pp.1-18.
Then, there was a Christian, a Pagan, and a Gnostic general view of the same phe-
nomenon, and each one’s interpretation could be used as part of the argument to sup-
port one’s group, or as a tool to use against the other groups.
In that sense, it is possible to understand how the Christian view of Hermetism
focused positively more on its theological/philosophical aspects. Christian theology
claimed that only Christians could perform true magic – called miracles – for they
were instruments of the only true God. Following this logic, all pagan magicians were
dealing with demons. Then, the process of assimilating the Hermetica to the Chris-
tian symbolic universe also created a distinction between ‘good’ Hermetica (philo-
sophical/theological contents) and ‘bad’ Hermetica (all contents encouraging
occult/magic/esoteric individual practices). Therefore, when Christians performed
their ideological separation of Hermetica, they were actually reproducing their
judgement on Egyptian pagan tradition – for the general agreement depicted the
Hermetica as Egyptian – and in another perspective, reproducing the Christian
judgement of the entire non-Christian social reality. On the other hand, magic was
part of the quotidian life not only in Egypt but in all pagan societies of antiquity as
well; its practice was also an important part of all cults to the gods across pagan
societies.
It would make no sense at all if the pagans’ approach on the Hermetica had pro-
moted any distinction between magical and theological contents in the Hermetica. As
they understood it, Hermetism, theurgy, astrology (and even alchemy), were the con-
nections between magical and theological contents of the doctrine. Such perception
was indeed later assimilated by Islamic thought. The Hermetica became part of the
Graeco-Roman society, and helped to shape its mentality. They were also useful in-
struments of mediation in the process of forming opinions under different social-
political ideologies. The Hermetica are a social discourse as long as they help to le-
gitimate lore, and produce a consensus - thus, a common sense - and support
ideologies.
List of Abbreviations
AH – Agyptologica Helvetica (Basel).
CH – Corpus Hermeticum. English version: B. P. Copenhaver (transl.), Hermetica.
(Cambridge: 2002); Greek Version: A.D. Nock, A. –J. Festugière (ed. and transl.)
Corpus Hermeticum: Tomes I, II - Traités I-XVIII, (Paris: 1945).
JEOL – Jaarbericht ex Oriente Lux (Leiden).
NHH – Nag Hammadi Hermetica: Codex VI-6 (The Discourse on the Eight and Ninth),
VI-7 (The Prayer of Thanksgiving), VI-8 (Asclepius: Coptic version from chap-
ters 21 to 28). Translated from Coptic by J. Brashler, P. A. Dirkse and D. M. Par-
rot. In: J. M. Robert (ed.) The Nag Hammadi Library in English. (New York: 1990).
Coptic version (fragmentary): J. Holzhausen, Das Corpus Hermeticum-Deutsch
II. (Stuttgart, Bad Cannstatt: 1997).
PGM – Papyri Graecae Magicae – English version: H. D. Betz (ed.) The Greek Magi-
cal Papyri in Translation. (Chicago, London: 2004). Greek version: K. Preisen-
danz, Papyri Graecae Magicae, 2 vols. (Stuttgart: 1973-4).
Bibliography
AFFIFI, A. E., “The Influence of Hermetic Literature on Moslem Thought.” In: Bul-
letin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 13/4, (Cambridge: 1951).
ASSMANN, J., Moses the Egyptian. (London: Harvard University Press, 1997).
BETZ, H. D., (ed.). The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation. (Chicago, London: Uni-
versity of Chicago Press, 2004).
BOURDIEU, P., Language and Symbolic Power. (Harvard: Harvard University Press,
1991).
______, Le Sens Pratique. (Paris: Ed. de Minuit, 1980).
BOWERSOCK, G.W., Julian the Apostate. (London: Harvard University Press, 1978).
BÜCHLI, J. , Der Poimandres, ein paganisiertes Evangelium. (Tübingen: 1987).
BURGIÈRE, P., ÉVIEUX, P., (transl.) Cyrille d’Alexandrie Contre Julien - vol.1. (Paris:
Cerf, 1985).
COPENHAVER, B. P., (transl.), Hermetica. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
2002).
DIELEMANN, J., Priests, Tongues, and Rites. (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2005).
______, “Claiming the Stars – Egyptian Priests Facing the Sky.” In: S. Bickel, A. Lo-
prieno (eds.) AH 17 (Basel: 2003), pp. 277-289.
DRIJVERS, H. J. W., “Bardaisan of Edessa and the Hermetica: The Aramaic Philoso-
pher and the Philosophy of his time”, in: JEOL, 21, 1970, pp.190-210.
FESTUGIÈRE, A.-J., La Révélation d`Hermès Trismégiste. (Paris:Les Belles Letres,
1944-54).
FOWDEN, G., The Egyptian Hermes. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993).
FREDOUILLE, J. –C., (transl.) Tertullien: Contra les Valentiniens. Tome II (Paris: Cerf,
1980).
GENEQUAND, Ch., “Platonism and Hermetism in al-Kindi’s Fi al-Nafs.” In: Zeit-
schrift für Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften 4 (Frankfurt: 1987-8),
pp.1-18.
GONZÁLES, J. L., The Story of Christianity: Vol. 1: The Early Church to the Reformation.
(San Francisco: Harper One, 1984).
GREEN, T. M., The City of the Moon God: Religious Traditions of Harran. (Leiden: Brill,
1992).
HAMILTON, W., (ed. and transl.), Ammianus Marcellinus, The Later Roman Empire
(A.D. 354-378). (New York: Penguin Classics, 1986).
HOLMYARD, E. J., Alchemy, (New York: Dover, 1990).
HOLZHAUSEN, J., Das Corpus Hermeticum-Deutsch II. (Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt:
Frommann Holzboog, 1997).
KRAUSE, M., “Der Stand der Veröffentlichung der Nag Hammadi-Texte”. In: U.
Bianchi (ed.), Le Originni dello Gnosticismo – Colloquio di Messina, 13-18 Aprile
1966. (Leiden: 1967).
LUCH, G., “Theurgy and Forms of Worship.” In: J. Neusner et alii, Religion, Science
and Magic. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), pp. 185-228.
MAHÉ, J. –P., Hermès en Haute-Égypte, I. (Québec: Presses de L’université Laval, 1978).
MERKUR, D., Gnosis: An Esoteric Tradition of Mystical Visions and Unions. (New York:
State University of New York Press, 1991).