What do you think?
Rate this book
Corpus Hermeticum
A collection of Greek writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistos, dating from some time before the close of the second century AD, Corpus Hermeticum forms the core of the Hermetic tradition, and was one of the main influences on and motivational factors for the Renaissance. This OMTO edition is based upon the classic translation by GRS Mead, lightly updated into more contemporary English to make the writings more accessible, however, with every effort made to leave Mead's masterful grammatical style intact. This is one of the world's greatest religio-philosophical and spiritual texts. It speaks directly to the human spirit and is the antithesis of an exoteric work, but rather one that aims to promote personal Gnosis. For these reasons, this edition resists the temptation to impose further interpretation or commentary upon the reader.
72 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1998
About the author
Hermes Trismegistus
234 books368 followersHermes Trismegistus (Ancient Greek: Ἑρμῆς ὁ Τρισμέγιστος, "thrice-greatest Hermes"; Latin: Mercurius ter Maximus) is the purported author of the Hermetic Corpus, a series of sacred texts that are the basis of Hermeticism.
Alternate names: Hermès Trismégiste, Hermes Trismegistro, Hermes Trimegistro, Hermes Trismegisto, Hermes Trimegisto.
Alternate names: Hermès Trismégiste, Hermes Trismegistro, Hermes Trimegistro, Hermes Trismegisto, Hermes Trimegisto.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 50 reviews
March 2, 2019
I had read John Everard's translation of the Hermetica previously, but this is the first time I had read G.R.S. Mead's translation. Because I was curious to contrast the deficiencies and/or merits of each, I decided to read both translations this time in tandem. I will, accordingly, offer my analysis of both and post this review for both versions.
Occasionally one or the other offers a better translation. This is either due to a better grasp of the text or a better source. Supposedly, only Mead had access to a Greek source and Everard relied on Ficino's Latin translation. I have not verified that this was the case. But, I can say, that often Everard provides a more fluid and less cumbersome translation. One should note something about both translators as well: Everard was a 17th century Christian mystic and Mead was a late 19th/early 20th century Theosophist and Neo-pagan. The dispositions of both are manifest here and there in their respective translations. I think both attempted to translate the text honestly but some bias is probable in both cases. Everard has an edge, not only because of the above factor, but he also includes four additional Hermetic treatises that Mead does not include in his version (or at least in this edition). I will admit that occasionally Mead does offer a better translation, so reading both is highly advisable, but if I were to recommend only one, it would probably be Everard's version; even though the English is a bit more antiquated.
As for the Hermetica itself: these represent the earliest Hermetic corpus, but, that being said, these writings probably go back to the late first or early second century and no earlier. They are very similar to texts one finds in the Nag Hammadi library. This really does indicate a common provenance and locale; i.e. Egypt, and probably Alexandria. I have held the opinion for a while that certain texts in the Nag Hammadi corpus are far closer to a form of Christian Hermeticism than a Christian Gnosticism; some examples include the Thomasine texts, and sundry others like the Apocryphon of James and the Sophia of Jesus Christ. It is clear though that the Hermetica is post Christian and was influenced by Christianity, as well as by Platonism and Greek philosophy in general. It does have great philosophical value as an example of Middle Platonism and as a precursor to Neo-Platonism. For that alone it is worth reading.
I am often torn in rating ancient texts. I'm a bit of an antiquarian and have a scholarly interest in any writing that is old and paradigmatic, so in the past I have rated a book according to that standard. A better barometer would be to balance a text's truth value with it's scholarly value. For a book like this 3 and a half stars takes into account both I think.
Occasionally one or the other offers a better translation. This is either due to a better grasp of the text or a better source. Supposedly, only Mead had access to a Greek source and Everard relied on Ficino's Latin translation. I have not verified that this was the case. But, I can say, that often Everard provides a more fluid and less cumbersome translation. One should note something about both translators as well: Everard was a 17th century Christian mystic and Mead was a late 19th/early 20th century Theosophist and Neo-pagan. The dispositions of both are manifest here and there in their respective translations. I think both attempted to translate the text honestly but some bias is probable in both cases. Everard has an edge, not only because of the above factor, but he also includes four additional Hermetic treatises that Mead does not include in his version (or at least in this edition). I will admit that occasionally Mead does offer a better translation, so reading both is highly advisable, but if I were to recommend only one, it would probably be Everard's version; even though the English is a bit more antiquated.
As for the Hermetica itself: these represent the earliest Hermetic corpus, but, that being said, these writings probably go back to the late first or early second century and no earlier. They are very similar to texts one finds in the Nag Hammadi library. This really does indicate a common provenance and locale; i.e. Egypt, and probably Alexandria. I have held the opinion for a while that certain texts in the Nag Hammadi corpus are far closer to a form of Christian Hermeticism than a Christian Gnosticism; some examples include the Thomasine texts, and sundry others like the Apocryphon of James and the Sophia of Jesus Christ. It is clear though that the Hermetica is post Christian and was influenced by Christianity, as well as by Platonism and Greek philosophy in general. It does have great philosophical value as an example of Middle Platonism and as a precursor to Neo-Platonism. For that alone it is worth reading.
I am often torn in rating ancient texts. I'm a bit of an antiquarian and have a scholarly interest in any writing that is old and paradigmatic, so in the past I have rated a book according to that standard. A better barometer would be to balance a text's truth value with it's scholarly value. For a book like this 3 and a half stars takes into account both I think.
January 5, 2020
The text is obviously beyond reviews. The more I read into it, the sadder I became knowing that such incredible book was about to end. I asked myself 'What else will I be reading from now on? There are hardly any more books of this type left that I'm able to obtain. What am I going to do for knowledge after this? Keep rereading...
January 8, 2014
very interesting concepts. thought-provoking, though for students seeking a text with language closer to modern English, yet still touching on Hermetic teachings with weight and understanding; i recommend reading 'the Kybalion'.
July 6, 2016
This is a very old book. One of the oldest surviving Hermetic manuscripts is the Papyrus Vindobonensis Graeca 29456, which dates to the end of the 2nd century AD. This is the review of Mead's translation. This book is described by its editors as the key work standing between the ancient Greek civilisation and the dawn of Christianity.
The first aspect that hits me in this book is the focus on God and all deity things that the thinking man of the second century was preoccupied with. Hence, the book seeks to discuss the nature of the Divine, logos (God's speech), mind and nature itself (including a very sophisticated discussion about motion and rest - physics- within the scope of cosmos); and it does not shy away of building a complicated conceptual framework. It offers very complex answers, depth and surprisingly current explanations to current issues - perhaps issues with which mankind always struggled to comprehend. For a book written millennia ago this is absolutely incredible! If I was starting on philosophical concepts and hermetics I would surely start with this book.
It's a short read and very well written, in a form of a dialogue between a student and his teacher, here understood to be Hermes Trismegistus (the thrice greatest Hermes) - with his thrice greatest book.
Honourable mention goes to the magnificent quote: "
H: God, therefore, is not Mind, but Cause that the Mind is; God is not Spirit, but Cause that Spirit is; God is not Light, but Cause that the Light is."
You will do well to read this. 4 stars.
The first aspect that hits me in this book is the focus on God and all deity things that the thinking man of the second century was preoccupied with. Hence, the book seeks to discuss the nature of the Divine, logos (God's speech), mind and nature itself (including a very sophisticated discussion about motion and rest - physics- within the scope of cosmos); and it does not shy away of building a complicated conceptual framework. It offers very complex answers, depth and surprisingly current explanations to current issues - perhaps issues with which mankind always struggled to comprehend. For a book written millennia ago this is absolutely incredible! If I was starting on philosophical concepts and hermetics I would surely start with this book.
It's a short read and very well written, in a form of a dialogue between a student and his teacher, here understood to be Hermes Trismegistus (the thrice greatest Hermes) - with his thrice greatest book.
Honourable mention goes to the magnificent quote: "
H: God, therefore, is not Mind, but Cause that the Mind is; God is not Spirit, but Cause that Spirit is; God is not Light, but Cause that the Light is."
You will do well to read this. 4 stars.
March 16, 2021
Habiendo sido criada dentro de la religión cristiana (protestante), y habiendome alejado de las prácticas dogmáticas hace años. Me he propuesto leer e investigar sobre distintas religiones. Corpus Hermeticum me ha parecido bastante similar a la biblia y la idea de Hermes Trismegisto me ha parecido una definición similar a la trinidad expuesta en la cristianidad. Un escrito interesante de manera general.
Read
August 1, 2018Çevirene, basana, dilimize kazandırana bin teşekkür. Tek seferde bütünüyle kavranacak bir metin değil (bkz. kavrayamadı :D) bu sebeple mutlaka tekrar okuyacağım.
January 19, 2019
Mead's translation is not my favorite, but reading these ancient treatises was more pleasurable than I expected. They are a great deal more interesting and intelligible than much of the Hermetic tradition since, shining a light on the religious mood of the Hellenistic age while also presenting inherently worthwhile philosophical material for consideration.
July 25, 2023
Alcuni trattati sono un po' ripetitivi e meno profondi rispetto al Poimandres e ad altri più brillanti. Tuttavia, rimane l'enorme importanza e la bellezza filosofica di un testo che apre le porte a verità mistiche.
January 1, 2024
ciężko mi ją w ogóle ocenić, czyta się bardzo długo i nie jest najłatwiejsza, momentami byłxm zachwycone żeby sekundę później nie być w stanie przeczytać ani jednego słowa więcej z kompletnym znudzeniem, ale ogólnie przesłanie bardzo mi się podoba więc mimo wszystko 3/5
December 7, 2022
If you enjoy your religio-philosophical systems to be led by an unforgettable legendary figure, then Hermeticism may be the most impressive teachings to fall into your palms. For our tale begins with Hermes Trismegistus, an entity whose hotly debated origins rival the finest legends ever told.
Some general agreement forms around the Ancient Egyptian god, Thoth. This abstract ibis-headed deity supervised many human practices, notably wisdom, writing, science, and magic. Meanwhile, the Ancient Greeks had Hermes (or the Roman Mercury), a once-mortal then-Olympian deity who (among numerous tasks) assisted communication between the gods and people. When the Greeks and Egyptians traded cultural ideas, the nations recognised these personalities as identical, and a merger occurred. Civilians effortlessly worshipped Thoth and Hermes as one, now recognised as the Thrice-Greatest Hermes Trismegistus, the "scribe of the gods", a spiritual aid who blessed his followers with esoteric knowledge from the divine.
Depending on who you speak to, the myth bleeds over every other spiritual timeline available. Certain scholars place Hermes as a contemporary of the Biblical Abraham or even a teacher of Moses. At the same time, Islamic and Baháʼí researchers equate him with the Quran's third prophet Idris. And as the ages have rolled onward, his texts have influenced every occult sect to date, most directly Thelema, Rosicrucianism, and Freemasonry, plus some fascinating Kabbalah offshoots. And even if none of this prods your memory sacks, you surely recognise Hermes' Caduceus logo of two snakes embracing a staff, aptly used as a symbol for commerce (Hermes was also the god of merchants) and later erroneously appropriated as a symbol for medicine.
For me, the most exciting element of this myth is that Hermes left us with an extensive body of work, collectively referred to as the Hermetica. I mean, how often do you read a book that was supposedly written by an authentic deity? Never have I ever? Of course, there are naysayer explanations. There always is, and they have merit. You see, back in the day, when inspiration knocked, a writer may believe some supernatural source of wisdom was speaking through them, and they'd prefer to gift credit to those powers above. It's a decent theory, but the content is so visionary in its information yet convincingly coherent in execution that attributing the effort to an all-knowing being almost feels more logical. Almost.
Now, when assessing the Hermetica texts themselves, you'll find quite a large selection, recorded between the third century BCE and the third century CE. They deal with an array of topics but are commonly split into two categories.
The first is the "technical" writings, which include astrology, alchemy, and magic. Within these is the influential Emerald Tablet, a brief but cryptic teaching which famously coined the phrase "as above, so below". This tablet is freely available online, so you can read it yourself in less than a minute.
The second is the "religio-philosophical" writings, focusing on anthropology, cosmology, and theology. And here we hold the most famous compilation of Hermes Trismegistus content, called the Corpus Hermeticum, woven together around the 15th century and translated into Latin. Due to this adaptation process, one must exercise a degree of caution, as per usual. We must recognise the vulnerabilities of authenticity. What we read is plausibly far removed from the original intentions, where language rephrasing and cultural pressures unmistakably made an impact.
Be that as it may, Hermeticism faired much better than the majority of theologies during the periods of religious suppression because Christianity shared some fascinating associations with Hermeticism. They both emerged in popularity in the late antiquity period, and many consider Hermes Trismegistus as a great sage who helped build the foundations of Christianity itself. In fact, debates persist today about which faith influenced the other the most. This observation opens a comparative conversation between specific terminologies, for example, where both doctrines seek answers inward while receiving revelations from a "God" figure. Still, Hermeticism was ultimately forced into underground cult status by Christianity, and religious authorities surely revised the surviving texts through the Biblical lens until editors were granted approval. So we take what we can get.
And, as it turns out, what we can get is quite a lot!
When a reported deity offers sacred information from the ether, the pressure is on to deliver. And Hermes does so despite the millennia that have since passed. Using the teacher-student format, Hermes engages in conversations, occasionally with the Greater Intelligence, but usually with his son, Tat, or another Greek god, Asclepius. And here, the secrets of the Universe are handed over verbally, eventually written, decoded a hundred times, and now in our grasp. It blows my mind that every human on the planet isn't scrambling to read these, because the premise is otherworldly! But we all have our priorities.
Regardless, I assume you are one of those who are keen to learn the code of the Universe? That's why you're here? Ok, I'll tell you.
But a FOREWARNING that everything from this point will be riddled with interpretations via the studies of Janthopoyism. For those who don't know, my beliefs have developed to be 100% Janthopoyistic, and I can no longer separate my cemented philosophies from other spiritual notions. I will ensure to explain myself each step of the way, but if you find yourself overcome by curiosity, please lean back into those texts.
Hermeticism is an idealistic faith whereby the entirety of reality is a construct of perception and does not persist outside the mind. Even deeper is that this Mind is One, everything an extension of "God", essentially living within the thoughts of the Supreme Being. Already we can relate this to a spectrum of other ideas, from the Eastern understanding of an illusionary existence (Maya) to the scientific evidence that matter is primarily electrical currents that behave differently when observed or measured (quantum mechanics). Janthopoyism agrees.
Once you arrive at the "God is the All" perspective, many alternate notions automatically fall into place. Hermeticism alludes to deterministic mechanics, where free will is largely a false impression. It is also a prisca theologia belief that states one true theology exists through all religions (which is the only reasonable conclusion when everything is hugged into the same circle anyway). Again, this is in tune with Janthopoyism completely.
So far so good! But that is not to say I easily swallow everything Hermes Trismegistus bestowed upon us. On the contrary, I take issue with plenty of its core ideas.
The interchangeable terminology between "Mind" and "God" is problematic. From a Janthopoyism standpoint, the mind is simply the electricity of Life meeting an otherwise useless fleshy organ. Thinking is akin to the function of the heartbeat or drawing air into the lungs. There is an energy source that keeps the body running, and then it leaves after death, the brain remaining with the corpse.
Hermeticism speaks of the mind as a divine quality tied to God. What's more, only some humans have a "mind", some humans don't, and no other species is so lucky. This bold statement creates a spiritual hierarchy that is wildly unprovable and dangerous. Ask anyone if they have a mind, and they will respond with a resounding yes. Ask anyone who has read the Corpus Hermeticum if they have a mind, and they will scoff from an even higher pedestal of egotism, believing they are privy to the genuine God-mind but, again, without a provable comparison point. And don't get me started on animals. I have stared into the eyes of creatures and fallen into God's depths. At times, more than that of any person.
Please note that I am not stating Hermes Trismegistus was incorrect, but I believe layers of interpretation have distorted the vocabulary. It is also possible that what Hermes attempted to convey was too advanced for a BCE crowd, and he submitted the closest comprehendible hypothesis he could at that period. That is why I appreciate translators such as Clement Salaman, who carefully sidestepped the "mind" to favour the word "Nous" instead. Conceptually, the two are not miles apart, but Nous is a deeper part of our intellect that deals with rational thinking required to perceive reality in a certain way. In occult conversations, this understanding applies to the underlying vibrational principle. That the All is all and all we are.
In a Janthopoyistic sense, there is a big difference between the mind and the observer. We have a spiritual essence (Soul? Atman?) that records data, perhaps even on an atomic level. A lot of this may be filtered through the brain organ as an instrument of perception, sure, but the mind itself is hardly something to worship as it's a mad flurry of radio gaga at the best of times. That is why I feel most comfortable replacing "mind" with "Nous" myself. Plus, if you ask someone whether they possess "Nous" or not, you will encourage far more deliciously complex answers (or blank stares).
To consider consciousness as some apex of divine awareness exposes nothing but the arrogance of humans. We struggle to fathom platforms above the ones we've reached; therefore, our peak becomes the peak of everything. If we are able to describe God's inner workings using our mental achievements alone, then I will be so disappointed that I am no longer interested whatsoever. Thankfully, I am more inclined to blame man's ego for such restraints on our imagination.
The "man-worship" of Hermeticism does not end there either. No, we are only just tapping the shell.
One clear Hermetic schooling is that we are an extension of divinity. Such a proposal predates everything. We can find it in the holy Hindu Vedas or even the conception of animism/shamanism devotion. However, Hermeticism clearly distinguishes between "God" and "nature", whereas humans lie in some middle ground. We are trapped in the mortal sense of materialism, but our eternal soul is nearer to that of a deity. There is enlightenment to unlock here, and we cannot deny our species' inherited desire to identify spiritual purpose, a drive seemingly exclusive to our DNA. But how do we know that certain animals haven't already achieved that zen quality we crave? Or, from an infinite Universe standpoint, what makes us think there is no race out there which has advanced much further than us? Again, it is a shortsighted ego-driven curse of the human being, where we have convinced ourselves that we are the best, and whatever else vibrates on a lower plain.
Janthopoyism teaches that everything is equally holy, using the electron as a base unit for sacred electricity while recognising a field of power that permeates each person, creature, and object, as well as the space between. That noted, I am open to softening my resistance as leeway for the times. Subatomic chitter and extraterrestrial chatter would not compute thousands of years ago. So even if an Egyptian god had access to such knowledge, relaying it could have been counterproductive. Or perhaps "God" itself did not comprehend these ideas back then, the Universe learning through perceptions like ours. Or maybe atoms didn't exist at that point, the minute details of science evolving as they were noticed, creating further data only as the growing wisdom called for it. These proposals are harmonious with Janthopoyism's scripture.
There are other nitpicky hiccups that have dated badly too, such as unforgivable astrological inaccuracies or the demand that every human must procreate as a cosmic order. But perhaps what resonated with me the least was the conviction that God is pure good. According to Hermes, strictly nothing else is good. Only God is good, and anything not-good is only that way because it is removed from God.
It's a common discussion where the murky side of life is explained via demons or at least an absence of God. On an emotional level, certain associations connect for me. Bad things feel bad because they are bad, and vice versa. But even in this acceptance, it contradicts the idea of God and The All as The One. How can an overarching process claim to encompass everything and then not include the entire spectrum of every topic? I get the "darkness is merely the lack of light" argument, but there is still a procedure in place where the light can come and go. Whatever that higher field may be, it transcends the God of Hermeticism, for that force is built into it. When speaking of a bulletproof Pantheistic God, we are referring to the realm where the physics of light and darkness apply, a system that was developed to contain every component of the program.
Therefore, despite claiming "The All", there is an advanced "God" found in many doctrines above that of Hermeticism. One where good and evil are a necessary balance and coexist by loving "design". We can find beauty in the whole package.
Following that groan is a similar groan against the ongoing need for esoteric and exoteric beliefs alike to compartmentalise concepts and then name each along the way. Janthopoyism finds considerable comfort in viewing the Universe as a singular entity. Breaking it down into nondualistic bits is of no interest to us. We view that practice as unnecessary and wholly unprovable. When a document claims God consists of x and y parts, it is but the renaming of the Cosmos' pieces that have been defined previously. Or they are introducing something brand new while lacking any evidence to support the suggestion. By default, I question why we must trust the words of some aged scripture as the blessed fact. I refuse to accept anything I cannot state without hypothesis. The absolute collection of everything under one name is unfathomable, but it undeniably exists on some infinite upper level. Beyond that is speculation or opinion.
I also have concerns that deal with mystical education in general. For starters, mysticism forever sells itself as something we can't logically understand but rather must be felt through personal experiences. I can grasp such sensible wisdom, for as soon as a theory provides globally accepted proof, it shifts into a science. Mysticism is an imperative category in our experimental studies of reality, but the loose criteria provide an abundance of wiggle room for self-appointed actualities.
And herein lies another sticky point that Hermeticism does so well: refashioning simple truths into slightly obscure presentations. By creating a cryptic puzzle for the reader to interpret, a resounding "Oh, I get it!" follows, delivering a false hit of accomplishment dopamine one could misconstrue as an epiphany. You feel you have cracked the code into something profound, whereas you merely unwound a web built for you so you can find a relatively uncomplicated centre. Even worse, the prize you uncover may only be a cheap mirror, vague enough to reflect and amplify preexisting assertions in your mind, offering a different answer to whoever stumbles upon it. Here is the greatest trick occult books have ever pulled. Crowley was a master of it. I can spot it everywhere.
Those objections aside, I readily admit that Hermeticism got more right than wrong through my eyes, altering my spiritual path for the better. So here comes the good stuff!
Arguably its most beneficial encouragement was to focus on the spirit and not the physical. One of its strongest warnings was against the materialistic world where our vices live. Our indulgences in sex, porn, food, sleep, drugs, or any other such body-based pleasures work to trap us deeper into the illusion. I have researched many Eastern traditions that teach similar practices (the dedication of Jainism stands out), and something inside me resonates with this as the most promising path. Possessions are a commonly discussed aspect, but even luxuries like homes and human relationships apply. By completely ridding oneself of everything material and then devoting your focus to the metaphysical being within, the God for you will grow. I know my spiritual future eventually moves this way.
Another essential education found in Hermeticism (and everywhere!) is that of ethical purity. Even the contemplations of living a virtuous life muster an awareness of divine purpose, and it makes practical sense too. Harnessing ugly emotions that scrape contrary to your principles will torture your days and hinder the world around you. But while ample faiths exploit after-life fears to morally herd society, Hermeticism's bait is one of powerful enlightenment or godlike abilities. That is a more enticing prize, and it has inspired me to gradually shift away from my mischievous pleasures. We should always strive to be better people, and Hermeticism offers attractive tools to achieve such goals.
In the end, the Corpus Hermeticum lived up to the hype and motivated me in much the same way as the Tao Te Ching or The Book of the Law. After heavy analyses, I came out the other side convinced I am interpreting the material slightly differently than the others and would love to offer my own translation one day. Additionally, there is something extra special when "Western" esoterics are not tangled in Abrahamics. It's a mysticism that feels deeply connected to a method that will really work if you work it. And that is something I love a lot.
Some general agreement forms around the Ancient Egyptian god, Thoth. This abstract ibis-headed deity supervised many human practices, notably wisdom, writing, science, and magic. Meanwhile, the Ancient Greeks had Hermes (or the Roman Mercury), a once-mortal then-Olympian deity who (among numerous tasks) assisted communication between the gods and people. When the Greeks and Egyptians traded cultural ideas, the nations recognised these personalities as identical, and a merger occurred. Civilians effortlessly worshipped Thoth and Hermes as one, now recognised as the Thrice-Greatest Hermes Trismegistus, the "scribe of the gods", a spiritual aid who blessed his followers with esoteric knowledge from the divine.
Depending on who you speak to, the myth bleeds over every other spiritual timeline available. Certain scholars place Hermes as a contemporary of the Biblical Abraham or even a teacher of Moses. At the same time, Islamic and Baháʼí researchers equate him with the Quran's third prophet Idris. And as the ages have rolled onward, his texts have influenced every occult sect to date, most directly Thelema, Rosicrucianism, and Freemasonry, plus some fascinating Kabbalah offshoots. And even if none of this prods your memory sacks, you surely recognise Hermes' Caduceus logo of two snakes embracing a staff, aptly used as a symbol for commerce (Hermes was also the god of merchants) and later erroneously appropriated as a symbol for medicine.
For me, the most exciting element of this myth is that Hermes left us with an extensive body of work, collectively referred to as the Hermetica. I mean, how often do you read a book that was supposedly written by an authentic deity? Never have I ever? Of course, there are naysayer explanations. There always is, and they have merit. You see, back in the day, when inspiration knocked, a writer may believe some supernatural source of wisdom was speaking through them, and they'd prefer to gift credit to those powers above. It's a decent theory, but the content is so visionary in its information yet convincingly coherent in execution that attributing the effort to an all-knowing being almost feels more logical. Almost.
Now, when assessing the Hermetica texts themselves, you'll find quite a large selection, recorded between the third century BCE and the third century CE. They deal with an array of topics but are commonly split into two categories.
The first is the "technical" writings, which include astrology, alchemy, and magic. Within these is the influential Emerald Tablet, a brief but cryptic teaching which famously coined the phrase "as above, so below". This tablet is freely available online, so you can read it yourself in less than a minute.
The second is the "religio-philosophical" writings, focusing on anthropology, cosmology, and theology. And here we hold the most famous compilation of Hermes Trismegistus content, called the Corpus Hermeticum, woven together around the 15th century and translated into Latin. Due to this adaptation process, one must exercise a degree of caution, as per usual. We must recognise the vulnerabilities of authenticity. What we read is plausibly far removed from the original intentions, where language rephrasing and cultural pressures unmistakably made an impact.
Be that as it may, Hermeticism faired much better than the majority of theologies during the periods of religious suppression because Christianity shared some fascinating associations with Hermeticism. They both emerged in popularity in the late antiquity period, and many consider Hermes Trismegistus as a great sage who helped build the foundations of Christianity itself. In fact, debates persist today about which faith influenced the other the most. This observation opens a comparative conversation between specific terminologies, for example, where both doctrines seek answers inward while receiving revelations from a "God" figure. Still, Hermeticism was ultimately forced into underground cult status by Christianity, and religious authorities surely revised the surviving texts through the Biblical lens until editors were granted approval. So we take what we can get.
And, as it turns out, what we can get is quite a lot!
When a reported deity offers sacred information from the ether, the pressure is on to deliver. And Hermes does so despite the millennia that have since passed. Using the teacher-student format, Hermes engages in conversations, occasionally with the Greater Intelligence, but usually with his son, Tat, or another Greek god, Asclepius. And here, the secrets of the Universe are handed over verbally, eventually written, decoded a hundred times, and now in our grasp. It blows my mind that every human on the planet isn't scrambling to read these, because the premise is otherworldly! But we all have our priorities.
Regardless, I assume you are one of those who are keen to learn the code of the Universe? That's why you're here? Ok, I'll tell you.
But a FOREWARNING that everything from this point will be riddled with interpretations via the studies of Janthopoyism. For those who don't know, my beliefs have developed to be 100% Janthopoyistic, and I can no longer separate my cemented philosophies from other spiritual notions. I will ensure to explain myself each step of the way, but if you find yourself overcome by curiosity, please lean back into those texts.
Hermeticism is an idealistic faith whereby the entirety of reality is a construct of perception and does not persist outside the mind. Even deeper is that this Mind is One, everything an extension of "God", essentially living within the thoughts of the Supreme Being. Already we can relate this to a spectrum of other ideas, from the Eastern understanding of an illusionary existence (Maya) to the scientific evidence that matter is primarily electrical currents that behave differently when observed or measured (quantum mechanics). Janthopoyism agrees.
Once you arrive at the "God is the All" perspective, many alternate notions automatically fall into place. Hermeticism alludes to deterministic mechanics, where free will is largely a false impression. It is also a prisca theologia belief that states one true theology exists through all religions (which is the only reasonable conclusion when everything is hugged into the same circle anyway). Again, this is in tune with Janthopoyism completely.
So far so good! But that is not to say I easily swallow everything Hermes Trismegistus bestowed upon us. On the contrary, I take issue with plenty of its core ideas.
The interchangeable terminology between "Mind" and "God" is problematic. From a Janthopoyism standpoint, the mind is simply the electricity of Life meeting an otherwise useless fleshy organ. Thinking is akin to the function of the heartbeat or drawing air into the lungs. There is an energy source that keeps the body running, and then it leaves after death, the brain remaining with the corpse.
Hermeticism speaks of the mind as a divine quality tied to God. What's more, only some humans have a "mind", some humans don't, and no other species is so lucky. This bold statement creates a spiritual hierarchy that is wildly unprovable and dangerous. Ask anyone if they have a mind, and they will respond with a resounding yes. Ask anyone who has read the Corpus Hermeticum if they have a mind, and they will scoff from an even higher pedestal of egotism, believing they are privy to the genuine God-mind but, again, without a provable comparison point. And don't get me started on animals. I have stared into the eyes of creatures and fallen into God's depths. At times, more than that of any person.
Please note that I am not stating Hermes Trismegistus was incorrect, but I believe layers of interpretation have distorted the vocabulary. It is also possible that what Hermes attempted to convey was too advanced for a BCE crowd, and he submitted the closest comprehendible hypothesis he could at that period. That is why I appreciate translators such as Clement Salaman, who carefully sidestepped the "mind" to favour the word "Nous" instead. Conceptually, the two are not miles apart, but Nous is a deeper part of our intellect that deals with rational thinking required to perceive reality in a certain way. In occult conversations, this understanding applies to the underlying vibrational principle. That the All is all and all we are.
In a Janthopoyistic sense, there is a big difference between the mind and the observer. We have a spiritual essence (Soul? Atman?) that records data, perhaps even on an atomic level. A lot of this may be filtered through the brain organ as an instrument of perception, sure, but the mind itself is hardly something to worship as it's a mad flurry of radio gaga at the best of times. That is why I feel most comfortable replacing "mind" with "Nous" myself. Plus, if you ask someone whether they possess "Nous" or not, you will encourage far more deliciously complex answers (or blank stares).
To consider consciousness as some apex of divine awareness exposes nothing but the arrogance of humans. We struggle to fathom platforms above the ones we've reached; therefore, our peak becomes the peak of everything. If we are able to describe God's inner workings using our mental achievements alone, then I will be so disappointed that I am no longer interested whatsoever. Thankfully, I am more inclined to blame man's ego for such restraints on our imagination.
The "man-worship" of Hermeticism does not end there either. No, we are only just tapping the shell.
One clear Hermetic schooling is that we are an extension of divinity. Such a proposal predates everything. We can find it in the holy Hindu Vedas or even the conception of animism/shamanism devotion. However, Hermeticism clearly distinguishes between "God" and "nature", whereas humans lie in some middle ground. We are trapped in the mortal sense of materialism, but our eternal soul is nearer to that of a deity. There is enlightenment to unlock here, and we cannot deny our species' inherited desire to identify spiritual purpose, a drive seemingly exclusive to our DNA. But how do we know that certain animals haven't already achieved that zen quality we crave? Or, from an infinite Universe standpoint, what makes us think there is no race out there which has advanced much further than us? Again, it is a shortsighted ego-driven curse of the human being, where we have convinced ourselves that we are the best, and whatever else vibrates on a lower plain.
Janthopoyism teaches that everything is equally holy, using the electron as a base unit for sacred electricity while recognising a field of power that permeates each person, creature, and object, as well as the space between. That noted, I am open to softening my resistance as leeway for the times. Subatomic chitter and extraterrestrial chatter would not compute thousands of years ago. So even if an Egyptian god had access to such knowledge, relaying it could have been counterproductive. Or perhaps "God" itself did not comprehend these ideas back then, the Universe learning through perceptions like ours. Or maybe atoms didn't exist at that point, the minute details of science evolving as they were noticed, creating further data only as the growing wisdom called for it. These proposals are harmonious with Janthopoyism's scripture.
There are other nitpicky hiccups that have dated badly too, such as unforgivable astrological inaccuracies or the demand that every human must procreate as a cosmic order. But perhaps what resonated with me the least was the conviction that God is pure good. According to Hermes, strictly nothing else is good. Only God is good, and anything not-good is only that way because it is removed from God.
It's a common discussion where the murky side of life is explained via demons or at least an absence of God. On an emotional level, certain associations connect for me. Bad things feel bad because they are bad, and vice versa. But even in this acceptance, it contradicts the idea of God and The All as The One. How can an overarching process claim to encompass everything and then not include the entire spectrum of every topic? I get the "darkness is merely the lack of light" argument, but there is still a procedure in place where the light can come and go. Whatever that higher field may be, it transcends the God of Hermeticism, for that force is built into it. When speaking of a bulletproof Pantheistic God, we are referring to the realm where the physics of light and darkness apply, a system that was developed to contain every component of the program.
Therefore, despite claiming "The All", there is an advanced "God" found in many doctrines above that of Hermeticism. One where good and evil are a necessary balance and coexist by loving "design". We can find beauty in the whole package.
Following that groan is a similar groan against the ongoing need for esoteric and exoteric beliefs alike to compartmentalise concepts and then name each along the way. Janthopoyism finds considerable comfort in viewing the Universe as a singular entity. Breaking it down into nondualistic bits is of no interest to us. We view that practice as unnecessary and wholly unprovable. When a document claims God consists of x and y parts, it is but the renaming of the Cosmos' pieces that have been defined previously. Or they are introducing something brand new while lacking any evidence to support the suggestion. By default, I question why we must trust the words of some aged scripture as the blessed fact. I refuse to accept anything I cannot state without hypothesis. The absolute collection of everything under one name is unfathomable, but it undeniably exists on some infinite upper level. Beyond that is speculation or opinion.
I also have concerns that deal with mystical education in general. For starters, mysticism forever sells itself as something we can't logically understand but rather must be felt through personal experiences. I can grasp such sensible wisdom, for as soon as a theory provides globally accepted proof, it shifts into a science. Mysticism is an imperative category in our experimental studies of reality, but the loose criteria provide an abundance of wiggle room for self-appointed actualities.
And herein lies another sticky point that Hermeticism does so well: refashioning simple truths into slightly obscure presentations. By creating a cryptic puzzle for the reader to interpret, a resounding "Oh, I get it!" follows, delivering a false hit of accomplishment dopamine one could misconstrue as an epiphany. You feel you have cracked the code into something profound, whereas you merely unwound a web built for you so you can find a relatively uncomplicated centre. Even worse, the prize you uncover may only be a cheap mirror, vague enough to reflect and amplify preexisting assertions in your mind, offering a different answer to whoever stumbles upon it. Here is the greatest trick occult books have ever pulled. Crowley was a master of it. I can spot it everywhere.
Those objections aside, I readily admit that Hermeticism got more right than wrong through my eyes, altering my spiritual path for the better. So here comes the good stuff!
Arguably its most beneficial encouragement was to focus on the spirit and not the physical. One of its strongest warnings was against the materialistic world where our vices live. Our indulgences in sex, porn, food, sleep, drugs, or any other such body-based pleasures work to trap us deeper into the illusion. I have researched many Eastern traditions that teach similar practices (the dedication of Jainism stands out), and something inside me resonates with this as the most promising path. Possessions are a commonly discussed aspect, but even luxuries like homes and human relationships apply. By completely ridding oneself of everything material and then devoting your focus to the metaphysical being within, the God for you will grow. I know my spiritual future eventually moves this way.
Another essential education found in Hermeticism (and everywhere!) is that of ethical purity. Even the contemplations of living a virtuous life muster an awareness of divine purpose, and it makes practical sense too. Harnessing ugly emotions that scrape contrary to your principles will torture your days and hinder the world around you. But while ample faiths exploit after-life fears to morally herd society, Hermeticism's bait is one of powerful enlightenment or godlike abilities. That is a more enticing prize, and it has inspired me to gradually shift away from my mischievous pleasures. We should always strive to be better people, and Hermeticism offers attractive tools to achieve such goals.
In the end, the Corpus Hermeticum lived up to the hype and motivated me in much the same way as the Tao Te Ching or The Book of the Law. After heavy analyses, I came out the other side convinced I am interpreting the material slightly differently than the others and would love to offer my own translation one day. Additionally, there is something extra special when "Western" esoterics are not tangled in Abrahamics. It's a mysticism that feels deeply connected to a method that will really work if you work it. And that is something I love a lot.
Read
February 1, 2024besides the fetish value involved as a canonized esoteric body of culture, gnosticism is appealing to internet people b/c surface readings of work like this absolutize narcissism. but if anyone followed these ideas to their conclusion they would realize its more important that everyone else is god about as much as you are and the lack of emphasis on this point renders this not very useful
August 20, 2020
Este fue un audiolibro, pero no he encontrado la versión en audiolibro.
La verdad es que había oído hablar mucho de este libro y tenía ganas de leerlo, pero a la vez me tiraba para atrás porque esta clase de libros escritos hace tanto tiempo, con una perspectiva cultural y temporal diferentes son muy densos y no son del todo comprehensibles.
En el mismo contenido del libro lo dice: que ese texto se acabaría traduciendo, pero que perdería la mayor parte del significado en el proceso. Esto no se debe sólo al cambio de contextos entre la fecha y situación en que fue escrito y la actualidad, sino que la mayor parte de la gente suele interpretar todo de un modo muy literal, o, deformando según interpretación personal, cosa absolutamente normal.
Igual, es una descripción de la vida. De lo que es la vida, lo existente, de que contiene todo, lo ocurrido y lo no ocurrido, lo que existe y aún no existe. Es una forma para describir conceptos cuánticos con un tinte excesivamente religioso, llamando Dios a la vida.
Había dos descripciones, una hacia su propio hijo, neófito. Con una descripción mucho más alegórica, y otra a alguien ya iniciado, con ejemplos mucho más concretos y entendibles a día de hoy, yo creo.
Lo que no me termina de gustar, a parte del misticismo religioso que le da a todo el tema, es que al final le lame un poco el trasero al rey de turno (llamemósle faraón, para entendernos), supongo porque se decía que eran descendientes de dios. Pero, vamos, que esa parte no me ha parecido muy normal xD
La verdad es que había oído hablar mucho de este libro y tenía ganas de leerlo, pero a la vez me tiraba para atrás porque esta clase de libros escritos hace tanto tiempo, con una perspectiva cultural y temporal diferentes son muy densos y no son del todo comprehensibles.
En el mismo contenido del libro lo dice: que ese texto se acabaría traduciendo, pero que perdería la mayor parte del significado en el proceso. Esto no se debe sólo al cambio de contextos entre la fecha y situación en que fue escrito y la actualidad, sino que la mayor parte de la gente suele interpretar todo de un modo muy literal, o, deformando según interpretación personal, cosa absolutamente normal.
Igual, es una descripción de la vida. De lo que es la vida, lo existente, de que contiene todo, lo ocurrido y lo no ocurrido, lo que existe y aún no existe. Es una forma para describir conceptos cuánticos con un tinte excesivamente religioso, llamando Dios a la vida.
Había dos descripciones, una hacia su propio hijo, neófito. Con una descripción mucho más alegórica, y otra a alguien ya iniciado, con ejemplos mucho más concretos y entendibles a día de hoy, yo creo.
Lo que no me termina de gustar, a parte del misticismo religioso que le da a todo el tema, es que al final le lame un poco el trasero al rey de turno (llamemósle faraón, para entendernos), supongo porque se decía que eran descendientes de dios. Pero, vamos, que esa parte no me ha parecido muy normal xD
April 13, 2018
This was a challenging text to delve into, which will require rereading of a different translation to understand better. The language Mead used at times was difficult to comprehend. One of the chapters I liked the most was "Mind Unto Hermes" which contained the line If, then, thou dost not make thyself like unto God, thou canst not know Him. For like is knowable unto like.
I was not impressed with this Forgotten Books publication as it did not include G.R.S. Mead's commentaries on each of the chapters with his translations. It also listed on the front cover John Michael Greer as the author, but did not even include his introduction to the book. Greer's introduction can be found here. The website, Sacred-Texts, has a complete version of G.R.S. Mead's translation with commentaries available here for those interested.
I have heard that The Way of Hermes, another translation of The Corpus Hermeticum, translated by Clement Salaman is a better edition. I'll have to try that one next.
I was not impressed with this Forgotten Books publication as it did not include G.R.S. Mead's commentaries on each of the chapters with his translations. It also listed on the front cover John Michael Greer as the author, but did not even include his introduction to the book. Greer's introduction can be found here. The website, Sacred-Texts, has a complete version of G.R.S. Mead's translation with commentaries available here for those interested.
I have heard that The Way of Hermes, another translation of The Corpus Hermeticum, translated by Clement Salaman is a better edition. I'll have to try that one next.
June 23, 2018
This is one of those texts that's considered a "must read" in many ceremonial magick/occult circles. While I understand the significance of learning the basics of Hermetic philosophy? This was probably one of the most painful texts I have had the honor of attempting to read through.
To get the best read out of this, you may need to get a separate translation. Many are available online. You may need them since the writing style is purposely convoluted as if Mead was attempting to add a bit more grandeur to the source material. The material itself will give you an understanding of this flavor of Gnosticism which can also help explain some of the "Whys" of modern ceremonial practices.
I recommend just getting a "Cliff notes" version.
To get the best read out of this, you may need to get a separate translation. Many are available online. You may need them since the writing style is purposely convoluted as if Mead was attempting to add a bit more grandeur to the source material. The material itself will give you an understanding of this flavor of Gnosticism which can also help explain some of the "Whys" of modern ceremonial practices.
I recommend just getting a "Cliff notes" version.
January 23, 2013
Esta colección de diálogos carece de la hermosa sencillez de un texto como el Tao Te Ching, pero expone de manera brillante el pensamiento de los filósofos-magos herméticos en sus aspectos teóricos y ontológicos.
Los diálogos se hacen más cortos al leerlos de lo que puede parecer, pero desentrañar sus símbolos requiere más que una simple lectura. Enterradas en las palabras se encuentran varios niveles de significado, ya que este colectivo no tenía como objetivo la divulgación de su filosofía.
Los diálogos se hacen más cortos al leerlos de lo que puede parecer, pero desentrañar sus símbolos requiere más que una simple lectura. Enterradas en las palabras se encuentran varios niveles de significado, ya que este colectivo no tenía como objetivo la divulgación de su filosofía.
February 5, 2015
The text is filled with Truth, but the influence of corruption has obviously changed much of it. I enjoyed Timothy Freke's "The Hermetica" more, which refines this text into a more pure and beautiful read, as I think it was meant to be.
August 18, 2020
There is a long list of books, which I would like to read and I have listed about 80 / 85 of them to be covered gradually. Every day, newer and newer books on ancient esoteric subjects appear – and their bibliography encompasses thousands of books, pamphlets and theses.
The book I recently finished was ‘The Vatican Heresy: Bernini and the Building of the Hermetic Temple of the Sun’ by Robert Bauval and Chiara Hohenzollern. As the book deals with the building of the Hermetic Temple of the Sun, there is widespread reference to ‘Corpus Hermeticum’ supposedly written by Hermes Trismegistus or the Egyptian god Thoth and hence there was one more book added to my collection of books to read – The Corpus Hermeticum by Hermes Trismegistus (English translation of course – since I do not know either Greek or Latin – the languages in which this book is available). According to ancient Egyptian sources, the Philosophy in Corpus Hermeticum was written many thousands of years ago by their god Thoth in the divine language of hieroglyphs. And since the later Egyptians did not know this language, Thoth’s grandson Hermes Trismegistus translated the writings to Greek.
And I began reading THE CORPUS HERMETICUM at the earliest. As I perused the book on my laptop, I was struck by an odd coincidence. Rudyard Kipling had written:
Oh East is East and West is West,
And ne’er the twain shall meet;
Till Earth and Heaven stand,
Before God’s great judgment seat.
But here was an eerie overlap of the Hermetic and Hindu philosophy. I am not a Christian by faith, but born in India, a follower of the much more ancient faith known in Sanskrit as SANATANA DHARMA and to the Westerners as Hinduism. This faith, even accepting the conclusion of Western scholars is at least 5,000 years old – though I believe that the followers of the faith have been around for 15,000 years or more. Even accepting the faith of 5,000 years, the scientific knowledge of the ancient Indian scholars in the subjects of astronomy, engineering, aviation and missile technology is astounding as is the knowledge of the ancient Egyptian scholars. For example, the Hindus daily pray to the Sun god and one of the prayers reads – “O Savitra, the eye of the Creation, famous throughout the universe as the preserver and destroyer, you are at the centre of the universe ……” – a predecessor to the heliocentric theory which the Western scholars knew only during the Renaissance – two millennia later and the Vatican took a further two centuries or more to accept the fact as truth – the scriptures (the Bible) notwithstanding.
“POEMANDRES, THE SHEPHERD OF MEN” is the most famous of the Hermetic documents, a revelation account describing a vision of the creation of the universe and the nature and fate of humanity.
Most Western Scholars have a blind spot – their faith in the Bible and till the end of the nineteenth century, it was so powerful a faith that nothing could have preceded the word of God as revealed in the Old and New Testaments. Therefore, the oldest record of creation was recorded in the Book of Genesis in OT and any other story of creation has to be compared and analysed with it. Hence it is no surprise that authors from the Renaissance onward have been struck by the way in which Hermetic creation myth seems partly inspired by Genesis, partly reacting against it. The Fall has here become the descent of the Primal Man through the spheres of the planets to the world of Nature, a descent caused not by disobedience but by love, and done with the blessing of God. To state the obvious, Hermes Trismegistus, was not a contemporary of Moses (as accepted by Renaissance scholars), but lived far earlier than him – and if the teachings of Moses and Hermes Trismegistus are eerily similar, one should remember, even though denied by later Jewish scholars, Moses had a royal upbringing and was educated in Egypt – perchance he gained knowledge of Hermeticism there – which is why many of their teachings and sayings may overlap.
The concepts expressed in ‘Poemandres’ is basically the Egyptian philosophy of life and creation -though with the usual arrogance the Western scholars attribute it to the Greeks, though the Egyptian civilization and philosophy is far older. These concepts are largely similar to the Hindu philosophy of creation. In section 17 the description is “In such wise than, as I have said, the generation of these seven came to pass. Earth was as woman, her Water filled with longing; ripeness she took from Fire, spirit from Aether. Nature thus brought forth frames to suit the form of Man.
And thus continued all the sense-world’s parts until the period of their end and new beginnings.”
According to these words, the form of Man is made from earth, water, fire and Aether (Air). The Hindu scriptures say that the human form is made from Earth, Water, Fire, Air and Ether and at the time of the destruction of the body (death) these elements return to their basic forms. It is the body that is destroyed – the spirit (Life/Soul) lives on forever.
In section 18, the Man-Shepherd says “The period being ended, the bond that bound them all was loosened by God’s Will. For all the animals being male-female, at the same time with Man were loosed apart; some became partly male, some in like fashion [partly] female. And straight-way God spake by His Holy Word (Logos):
Increase ye in increasing, and multiply in multitude, ye creatures and creations all; and man that hath Mind in him, let him learn to know that he himself is deathless, and that the cause of death is love, though Love is all.”
The Hindu scriptures state that in the beginning Brahma – the Creator – created his sons in his own form and wanted them to multiply, but they were more inclined to worship and perform austerities to realize God. The first sons of Brahma are the Sanat Kumaras. He then tried once again, the Saptarishis, who became stars in the sky – the Pledias - but again failing, decided to split the human form into male and female and from the union of the male and female would all life forms be created.
WERE BOTH THESE ANCIENT CIVILIZATIONS TAUGHT BY THE SAME HIGHER POWER – WE CALL GOD?!!!?
The dialogue ‘TO ASCLEPIUS’ sets forth the difference between the physical and metaphysical worlds in the context of Greek (Egyptian) natural philosophy.
‘THE CUP OR THE MONAD’ gives an unusually lucid overview of the foundations of Hermetic thought. The stress on rejection of the body and its pleasures, and on the division of humanity into those with Mind and those without, are reminiscent of some of the so-called “Gnostic” writings of the same period. “The senses of such men are like irrational creatures’; and as their [whole] make- up is in their feelings and their impulses, they fail in all appreciation of it.: “they do not wonder at” those things which really are worth contemplation. These centre all their thought upon the pleasures of the body and its appetites, in the belief that for its sake man hath come into being. And having raised themselves so far they sight the Good; and having sighted it, they look upon their sojourn here as a mischance; and in disdain of all, both things in body and the bodiless, they speed their way unto that One and Only One.”
The idea that the division is a matter of choice rings a bell in the mind of an orthodox Hindu philosopher. I am once again struck by the similarity between the Gnostic ideas and the Hindu philosophy. Though the terminology and descriptions may vary, the essence is the same. The stress on rejection of the body and its pleasures, and concentration on the Mind, brings to mind the teachings of Hindu thought – in place of Mind, Hindus have Atman – the soul or spirit – and it is the soul that has to be looked after for the person to attain full knowledge of the Divine. In Hinduism also it is advised to eschew the lure of the senses and concentrate on the Divine One. The sensual body is just a cover for the immortal, genderless Atman. Just as we discard old, torn, clothes, the Atman regular discards its cover the body and moves into another in its quest for the Divine Knowledge which will ultimately lead it to merge itself with the Divine One.
The sermon THOUGH UNMANIFEST GOD IS MOST MANIFEST is a fairly straightforward Hermetic version of the “argument by design”, a standard approach since ancient times to a proof of the existence of God. Typically, for a Hermetic tractate, its choice of evidence includes a paean on the beauty and perfection of the human form.
In the introduction to this volume John Michael Greer (JMG) states “The fifteen tractates of the Corpus Hermeticum, along with the Perfect Sermon or Asclepius, are the foundation documents of the Hermetic tradition. Written by unknown authors in Egypt sometime before the end of the third century C.E., they were part of a once substantial literature attributed to the mythic figure of Hermes Trismegistus, a Hellenistic fusion of the Greek god Hermes and the Egyptian god Thoth.”
The sermon IN GOD ALONE IS GOOD AND ELSEWHERE NOWHERE the nature of Good is discussed. About this sermon JMG states “The negative attitude toward humanity and the cosmos which appears in this text contrasts sharply with the more positive assessment found, for example, in the Poemandres (CH I) or in the Asclepius - a reminder that these documents are relics of a diverse and not necessarily consistent school of thought.” I, however, with my little learning beg to differ. In the Hindu works I have come across, the same philosophy of life is presented in some cases in a positive vein and in others in a negative vein – while the authorship is not clearly known, the compilation and narration is by Maharishi Krishna Dwaipayana the Vyasa (the Hindu Hermes Trismegistus). It is possible that the Hermeticum philosophy has similarly evolved.
The sermon THE GREATEST ILL AMONG MEN IS IGNORANCE OF GOD is a good solid diatribe in colourful language.
In the sermon THAT NO ONE OF EXISTING THINGS DOTH PERISH, BUT MEN IN ERROR SPEAK OF THEIR CHANGES AS DESTRUCTIONS AND AS DEATHS the cyclical change of nature is once again discussed. It was briefly touched upon in THE SACRED SERMON earlier. Central to this grounded in astrology is that as the planets returned after vast cycles of time to the same positions, so all events on earth would repeat themselves precisely into eternity in the future - and had done so from eternity in the past. The technical term for this recurrence, apocatastasis.
The Hindu belief of many constructions, destructions and reconstruction are similar. The Hindu scriptures of God’s creation, which exists for a Kalpa, at the end of which everything merges back into the void from which it arose. After a pause for half a Kalpa, the Creator awakes once again and recommences His creation. As per Shrimad Bhagavatam a Kalpa covers a period of 1,000 Mahayugas. Each Mahayuga lasts for 4,320,000 (4.32 million years). Therefore, a Kalpa covers a period 4,320,000,000 years (4.3 2 billion years).
The essay ON THOUGHT AND SENSE deals with a series of topics, starting with (and to some extent from) the concept that the set of perceptions we call “thoughts” and the set we call “sensory perceptions” are not significantly different from each other. The implications of this idea play a significant role in later Hermetic thought, particularly in the areas of magic and the Art of Memory; in this tractate, though, the issues involved are barely touched, and the argument wanders into moral dualisms and the equally important, but distinct, idea that the Cosmos is itself a divine creative power. Understanding is held up as the source and precondition of belief, should probably be seen as part of the same ancient debate on the roles of faith and reason that gave rise to Tertullian’s famous credo quia absurdum (“I believe because it is absurd”).
The tract THE KEY explicitly presents a summary or abridgement of the General Sermons, and discusses the Hermetic view of knowledge and its role in the lives and after lives of human beings. There are certain contradictions between the afterlife-teachings of this and previous tracts. The delightful irony of the Zen moment early in section 9, when Hermes - in the middle of this very substantial lecture - defines the good and pious man as “he who doth not say much or lend his ear to much” and thus rules out both himself and his audience, has not been covered by subsequent commentators.
Some of the passages of this tract, I reproduce below:
Thus some that were creeping things change into things that in the water dwell, the souls of water things change to earth-dwellers, those that live on earth change to things with wings, and souls that live in air change to men, while human souls reach the first step of deathlessness changed into daimones.”
But if a soul on entering the body of a man persisteth in its vice, it neither tasteth deathlessness nor shareth in the Good; but speeding back again it turns into the path that leads to creeping things. This is the sentence of the vicious soul.
And the soul’s vice is ignorance. For that the soul who hath no knowledge of the things that are, or knowledge of their nature, or of Good, is blinded by the body’s passions and tossed about. This wretched soul, not knowing what she is, becomes the slave of bodies of strange form in sorry plight, bearing the body as a load; not as the ruler, but the ruled. This [ignorance] is the soul’s vice.
But on the other hand the virtue of the soul is Gnosis. For he who knows, he good and pious is, and still while on the earth divine.”
The Hindu theory of Karma and reincarnation, states more or less the same principles. The Karma – actions – the Atman performs in the body it is in, determines in which form its next incarnation will be. The cycles of births and deaths will go on as the Atman migrates from body to body, till all its bad Karma is washed off and in the final life it will realize the Godhead.
Speaking about the differing tongues of men, Hermes clarifies that in spite of differing tongues, MAN IS ONE. This is similar to the concept in Hindu Philosophy – VASUDAIVA KUTUMBAKAM – (WORLD ONE FAMILY).
It would be a repetition to once again state that the Hermetic Philosophy and the ancient Hindu Philosophy and Buddhist Philosophy have many overlapping points and are much similar in their approach to many subjects. To have comparison of all the points covered in this book would itself be the subject matter of a separate book.
I was really impressed by this book and enjoyed reading it. I would recommend it to people interested in philosophy, history and religious beliefs in general.
The book I recently finished was ‘The Vatican Heresy: Bernini and the Building of the Hermetic Temple of the Sun’ by Robert Bauval and Chiara Hohenzollern. As the book deals with the building of the Hermetic Temple of the Sun, there is widespread reference to ‘Corpus Hermeticum’ supposedly written by Hermes Trismegistus or the Egyptian god Thoth and hence there was one more book added to my collection of books to read – The Corpus Hermeticum by Hermes Trismegistus (English translation of course – since I do not know either Greek or Latin – the languages in which this book is available). According to ancient Egyptian sources, the Philosophy in Corpus Hermeticum was written many thousands of years ago by their god Thoth in the divine language of hieroglyphs. And since the later Egyptians did not know this language, Thoth’s grandson Hermes Trismegistus translated the writings to Greek.
And I began reading THE CORPUS HERMETICUM at the earliest. As I perused the book on my laptop, I was struck by an odd coincidence. Rudyard Kipling had written:
Oh East is East and West is West,
And ne’er the twain shall meet;
Till Earth and Heaven stand,
Before God’s great judgment seat.
But here was an eerie overlap of the Hermetic and Hindu philosophy. I am not a Christian by faith, but born in India, a follower of the much more ancient faith known in Sanskrit as SANATANA DHARMA and to the Westerners as Hinduism. This faith, even accepting the conclusion of Western scholars is at least 5,000 years old – though I believe that the followers of the faith have been around for 15,000 years or more. Even accepting the faith of 5,000 years, the scientific knowledge of the ancient Indian scholars in the subjects of astronomy, engineering, aviation and missile technology is astounding as is the knowledge of the ancient Egyptian scholars. For example, the Hindus daily pray to the Sun god and one of the prayers reads – “O Savitra, the eye of the Creation, famous throughout the universe as the preserver and destroyer, you are at the centre of the universe ……” – a predecessor to the heliocentric theory which the Western scholars knew only during the Renaissance – two millennia later and the Vatican took a further two centuries or more to accept the fact as truth – the scriptures (the Bible) notwithstanding.
“POEMANDRES, THE SHEPHERD OF MEN” is the most famous of the Hermetic documents, a revelation account describing a vision of the creation of the universe and the nature and fate of humanity.
Most Western Scholars have a blind spot – their faith in the Bible and till the end of the nineteenth century, it was so powerful a faith that nothing could have preceded the word of God as revealed in the Old and New Testaments. Therefore, the oldest record of creation was recorded in the Book of Genesis in OT and any other story of creation has to be compared and analysed with it. Hence it is no surprise that authors from the Renaissance onward have been struck by the way in which Hermetic creation myth seems partly inspired by Genesis, partly reacting against it. The Fall has here become the descent of the Primal Man through the spheres of the planets to the world of Nature, a descent caused not by disobedience but by love, and done with the blessing of God. To state the obvious, Hermes Trismegistus, was not a contemporary of Moses (as accepted by Renaissance scholars), but lived far earlier than him – and if the teachings of Moses and Hermes Trismegistus are eerily similar, one should remember, even though denied by later Jewish scholars, Moses had a royal upbringing and was educated in Egypt – perchance he gained knowledge of Hermeticism there – which is why many of their teachings and sayings may overlap.
The concepts expressed in ‘Poemandres’ is basically the Egyptian philosophy of life and creation -though with the usual arrogance the Western scholars attribute it to the Greeks, though the Egyptian civilization and philosophy is far older. These concepts are largely similar to the Hindu philosophy of creation. In section 17 the description is “In such wise than, as I have said, the generation of these seven came to pass. Earth was as woman, her Water filled with longing; ripeness she took from Fire, spirit from Aether. Nature thus brought forth frames to suit the form of Man.
And thus continued all the sense-world’s parts until the period of their end and new beginnings.”
According to these words, the form of Man is made from earth, water, fire and Aether (Air). The Hindu scriptures say that the human form is made from Earth, Water, Fire, Air and Ether and at the time of the destruction of the body (death) these elements return to their basic forms. It is the body that is destroyed – the spirit (Life/Soul) lives on forever.
In section 18, the Man-Shepherd says “The period being ended, the bond that bound them all was loosened by God’s Will. For all the animals being male-female, at the same time with Man were loosed apart; some became partly male, some in like fashion [partly] female. And straight-way God spake by His Holy Word (Logos):
Increase ye in increasing, and multiply in multitude, ye creatures and creations all; and man that hath Mind in him, let him learn to know that he himself is deathless, and that the cause of death is love, though Love is all.”
The Hindu scriptures state that in the beginning Brahma – the Creator – created his sons in his own form and wanted them to multiply, but they were more inclined to worship and perform austerities to realize God. The first sons of Brahma are the Sanat Kumaras. He then tried once again, the Saptarishis, who became stars in the sky – the Pledias - but again failing, decided to split the human form into male and female and from the union of the male and female would all life forms be created.
WERE BOTH THESE ANCIENT CIVILIZATIONS TAUGHT BY THE SAME HIGHER POWER – WE CALL GOD?!!!?
The dialogue ‘TO ASCLEPIUS’ sets forth the difference between the physical and metaphysical worlds in the context of Greek (Egyptian) natural philosophy.
‘THE CUP OR THE MONAD’ gives an unusually lucid overview of the foundations of Hermetic thought. The stress on rejection of the body and its pleasures, and on the division of humanity into those with Mind and those without, are reminiscent of some of the so-called “Gnostic” writings of the same period. “The senses of such men are like irrational creatures’; and as their [whole] make- up is in their feelings and their impulses, they fail in all appreciation of it.: “they do not wonder at” those things which really are worth contemplation. These centre all their thought upon the pleasures of the body and its appetites, in the belief that for its sake man hath come into being. And having raised themselves so far they sight the Good; and having sighted it, they look upon their sojourn here as a mischance; and in disdain of all, both things in body and the bodiless, they speed their way unto that One and Only One.”
The idea that the division is a matter of choice rings a bell in the mind of an orthodox Hindu philosopher. I am once again struck by the similarity between the Gnostic ideas and the Hindu philosophy. Though the terminology and descriptions may vary, the essence is the same. The stress on rejection of the body and its pleasures, and concentration on the Mind, brings to mind the teachings of Hindu thought – in place of Mind, Hindus have Atman – the soul or spirit – and it is the soul that has to be looked after for the person to attain full knowledge of the Divine. In Hinduism also it is advised to eschew the lure of the senses and concentrate on the Divine One. The sensual body is just a cover for the immortal, genderless Atman. Just as we discard old, torn, clothes, the Atman regular discards its cover the body and moves into another in its quest for the Divine Knowledge which will ultimately lead it to merge itself with the Divine One.
The sermon THOUGH UNMANIFEST GOD IS MOST MANIFEST is a fairly straightforward Hermetic version of the “argument by design”, a standard approach since ancient times to a proof of the existence of God. Typically, for a Hermetic tractate, its choice of evidence includes a paean on the beauty and perfection of the human form.
In the introduction to this volume John Michael Greer (JMG) states “The fifteen tractates of the Corpus Hermeticum, along with the Perfect Sermon or Asclepius, are the foundation documents of the Hermetic tradition. Written by unknown authors in Egypt sometime before the end of the third century C.E., they were part of a once substantial literature attributed to the mythic figure of Hermes Trismegistus, a Hellenistic fusion of the Greek god Hermes and the Egyptian god Thoth.”
The sermon IN GOD ALONE IS GOOD AND ELSEWHERE NOWHERE the nature of Good is discussed. About this sermon JMG states “The negative attitude toward humanity and the cosmos which appears in this text contrasts sharply with the more positive assessment found, for example, in the Poemandres (CH I) or in the Asclepius - a reminder that these documents are relics of a diverse and not necessarily consistent school of thought.” I, however, with my little learning beg to differ. In the Hindu works I have come across, the same philosophy of life is presented in some cases in a positive vein and in others in a negative vein – while the authorship is not clearly known, the compilation and narration is by Maharishi Krishna Dwaipayana the Vyasa (the Hindu Hermes Trismegistus). It is possible that the Hermeticum philosophy has similarly evolved.
The sermon THE GREATEST ILL AMONG MEN IS IGNORANCE OF GOD is a good solid diatribe in colourful language.
In the sermon THAT NO ONE OF EXISTING THINGS DOTH PERISH, BUT MEN IN ERROR SPEAK OF THEIR CHANGES AS DESTRUCTIONS AND AS DEATHS the cyclical change of nature is once again discussed. It was briefly touched upon in THE SACRED SERMON earlier. Central to this grounded in astrology is that as the planets returned after vast cycles of time to the same positions, so all events on earth would repeat themselves precisely into eternity in the future - and had done so from eternity in the past. The technical term for this recurrence, apocatastasis.
The Hindu belief of many constructions, destructions and reconstruction are similar. The Hindu scriptures of God’s creation, which exists for a Kalpa, at the end of which everything merges back into the void from which it arose. After a pause for half a Kalpa, the Creator awakes once again and recommences His creation. As per Shrimad Bhagavatam a Kalpa covers a period of 1,000 Mahayugas. Each Mahayuga lasts for 4,320,000 (4.32 million years). Therefore, a Kalpa covers a period 4,320,000,000 years (4.3 2 billion years).
The essay ON THOUGHT AND SENSE deals with a series of topics, starting with (and to some extent from) the concept that the set of perceptions we call “thoughts” and the set we call “sensory perceptions” are not significantly different from each other. The implications of this idea play a significant role in later Hermetic thought, particularly in the areas of magic and the Art of Memory; in this tractate, though, the issues involved are barely touched, and the argument wanders into moral dualisms and the equally important, but distinct, idea that the Cosmos is itself a divine creative power. Understanding is held up as the source and precondition of belief, should probably be seen as part of the same ancient debate on the roles of faith and reason that gave rise to Tertullian’s famous credo quia absurdum (“I believe because it is absurd”).
The tract THE KEY explicitly presents a summary or abridgement of the General Sermons, and discusses the Hermetic view of knowledge and its role in the lives and after lives of human beings. There are certain contradictions between the afterlife-teachings of this and previous tracts. The delightful irony of the Zen moment early in section 9, when Hermes - in the middle of this very substantial lecture - defines the good and pious man as “he who doth not say much or lend his ear to much” and thus rules out both himself and his audience, has not been covered by subsequent commentators.
Some of the passages of this tract, I reproduce below:
Thus some that were creeping things change into things that in the water dwell, the souls of water things change to earth-dwellers, those that live on earth change to things with wings, and souls that live in air change to men, while human souls reach the first step of deathlessness changed into daimones.”
But if a soul on entering the body of a man persisteth in its vice, it neither tasteth deathlessness nor shareth in the Good; but speeding back again it turns into the path that leads to creeping things. This is the sentence of the vicious soul.
And the soul’s vice is ignorance. For that the soul who hath no knowledge of the things that are, or knowledge of their nature, or of Good, is blinded by the body’s passions and tossed about. This wretched soul, not knowing what she is, becomes the slave of bodies of strange form in sorry plight, bearing the body as a load; not as the ruler, but the ruled. This [ignorance] is the soul’s vice.
But on the other hand the virtue of the soul is Gnosis. For he who knows, he good and pious is, and still while on the earth divine.”
The Hindu theory of Karma and reincarnation, states more or less the same principles. The Karma – actions – the Atman performs in the body it is in, determines in which form its next incarnation will be. The cycles of births and deaths will go on as the Atman migrates from body to body, till all its bad Karma is washed off and in the final life it will realize the Godhead.
Speaking about the differing tongues of men, Hermes clarifies that in spite of differing tongues, MAN IS ONE. This is similar to the concept in Hindu Philosophy – VASUDAIVA KUTUMBAKAM – (WORLD ONE FAMILY).
It would be a repetition to once again state that the Hermetic Philosophy and the ancient Hindu Philosophy and Buddhist Philosophy have many overlapping points and are much similar in their approach to many subjects. To have comparison of all the points covered in this book would itself be the subject matter of a separate book.
I was really impressed by this book and enjoyed reading it. I would recommend it to people interested in philosophy, history and religious beliefs in general.
October 27, 2021
Feels like rating the Bible, so take the 3* with a grain of salt, lol.
The Corpus Hermeticum is 17 essays, the first of which got me into starting to read it, the conversation of Pomander and Hermes Trismegistus. It was a bit 'disappointing' because it was much more difficult to read than the Kybalion a week ago. The 'listicle' style of the Kybalion, its principles delineated in some straightforward way, makes it very accessible. Here, it was often not very clear what is being talked about, despite the very nice dialog form of the text. Spending some more time with it would solve that, it's not *incredibly* difficult but I think I'm done with Hermeticism for now.
It's mind-blowing how the texts were written in the first century and had so much obscure influence through antiquity and the medieval times. Wikipedia mentions Pico della Mirandola (1463–1494), Giordano Bruno (1548–1600), Francesco Patrizi (1529–1597), Robert Fludd (1574–1637) [for future reference].
The Corpus Hermeticum is 17 essays, the first of which got me into starting to read it, the conversation of Pomander and Hermes Trismegistus. It was a bit 'disappointing' because it was much more difficult to read than the Kybalion a week ago. The 'listicle' style of the Kybalion, its principles delineated in some straightforward way, makes it very accessible. Here, it was often not very clear what is being talked about, despite the very nice dialog form of the text. Spending some more time with it would solve that, it's not *incredibly* difficult but I think I'm done with Hermeticism for now.
It's mind-blowing how the texts were written in the first century and had so much obscure influence through antiquity and the medieval times. Wikipedia mentions Pico della Mirandola (1463–1494), Giordano Bruno (1548–1600), Francesco Patrizi (1529–1597), Robert Fludd (1574–1637) [for future reference].
February 13, 2024
A sit down and really focus kind of book. You can't passively read this, what it's saying requires a thorough comprehension of each statement. The older style English might throw a few people but is necessary for truer translation. As I understand it, this book is the Greek translation and not the Latin one, and in fact may be missing a section that the Latin one has. I see the Corpus Hermetic referenced in many places so I'm glad I read at least one version. I might change my review when I can compare the other one.
November 16, 2021
Very compelling work,
one can definitely see the emerging strains of philosophical thought that would later be absorbed into Neo-platonism and gnosticism. Interesting pseudo-theurgical elements as well, especially during the Mountain Sermon.
Noticed an interesting comment concerning a Jesuit priest, Athanasius Kircher, who claimed that Hermes Thrice-Great was Moses, which would be quite a stretch.
one can definitely see the emerging strains of philosophical thought that would later be absorbed into Neo-platonism and gnosticism. Interesting pseudo-theurgical elements as well, especially during the Mountain Sermon.
Noticed an interesting comment concerning a Jesuit priest, Athanasius Kircher, who claimed that Hermes Thrice-Great was Moses, which would be quite a stretch.
August 8, 2024
ok maybe my review isn’t fair because i stopped reading this book at page 60. but it genuinely hurt my brain so much i had to put it down. maybe it’s just the translation i got or maybe i’m just not fit to read these type of esoteric books. i did underline parts of the text i understood and found to be very thought provoking, but it wasn’t often. it’s a book you need to read with an immense amount of focus and great understanding.
Read
September 5, 2024This is a compilation of classical texts. I guess that “complicated” doesn’t always mean better than “simple” or “easy”. Corpus Hermeticum is very hard to read. I might be wrong, but I have a feeling that the text is artificially made more complicated by the authors.
If you like difficult texts, then this is a book for you.
If you like difficult texts, then this is a book for you.
November 14, 2023
God the father is eternal and good the evil is like that of rust to copper and man mortal unless the mind becomes divine which is immortal becomes like the dross becomes like the blade from the anvil rendering eternal the fruit
December 28, 2020
I rarely write reviews, but anybody interested in esoterica/world religion (especially Westerners) must reads this
November 1, 2021
Highly centered around an idea of God and him being the one and almighty good. Most points seem to be repeated on this and not as spiritual as I'd hoped. Very difficult to read and interpret
Read
January 19, 2022This turned my mind to soup.
May 18, 2022
audiolibro*
Hay, sin duda, mucho qué decir
Pero hablemos de varios puntos que se me han quedado
El tema de la traducción y la pérdida de significado
Uhm el dios es el bien
Hahaha
Hay, sin duda, mucho qué decir
Pero hablemos de varios puntos que se me han quedado
El tema de la traducción y la pérdida de significado
Uhm el dios es el bien
Hahaha
October 23, 2022
Non c'è una vera valutazione da dare, un libro profondo da leggere e rileggere
January 9, 2023
I don't know if the fault is on the translation, but it is painful to read; like a schizophrenic word salad. I see bits of gems, but there are lots of repetitive filler around it.
July 6, 2023
The first chapter was very similar to the creation story in genesis. Interesting read.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 50 reviews