Hermetica: The Greek Corpus Hermeticum and the Latin Asclepius

by Hermes Trismegistus, Brian P. Copenhaver (Translator/Editor)

The Hermetica are a body of mystical texts written in late antiquity, but believed during the Renaissance (when they became well known) to be much older. Their supposed author, a mythical figure named Hermes Trismegistus, was thought to be a contemporary of Moses. The Hermetic philosophy was regarded as an ancient theology, parallel to the revealed wisdom of the Bible, supporting Biblical revelation and culminating in the Platonic philosophical tradition. This new translation is the only English version based on reliable texts, and Professor Copenhaver's introduction and notes make this accessible and up-to-date edition an indispensable resource to scholars.

Genres: Philosophy, Occult, Religion, Spirituality, History, Nonfiction, Classics

408 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 301

About the author

Hermes 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.

Reviews

[Christopher Plaisance · Rating 5 out of 5]

Copenhaver's introduction to the Hermetic corpus approaches the historical origins of Hermetism and Hermeticism from, seemingly, all angles—at once dispelling the mythic history that surrounded Hermes Trismegistus and clarifying the texts' rightful place in the greater context of Hellenistic philosophy and theology. The most valuable aspect, I found, of his introductory essay was the exploration of Hermetism as an ultimately syncretic religious movement that exemplified the concurrent cultural syncretism of first and second century Alexandria. As a complement to older introductory works to the same subject, Copenhaver modernizes the broader view of Hermetism by taking into account the recently discovered collection of Coptic Gnostic and Hermetic texts at Nag Hammadi. This allows for a better understanding of the relationship between Gnostic metaphysics and the theoretical Hermetica, dispelling notions of a rigid divide between the two systems. Introduction aside, the translation itself is wonderfully put together and is extrapolated upon by one hundred and sixty-seven pages of etymological, historical and philosophical notes on the text of the corpus. All of this combines to make Copenhaver one of the definitive modern sources on early Hermetism.

[Ryan Freeman · Rating 3 out of 5]

Of literary value?
Yes.
Important obscure mysticism?
Yes yes.
Dry as all get out?
Ugh. Yes.

[Huda Aweys · Rating 4 out of 5]

لتحميل : كتاب (كلمات هرمس) المنسوب للحكيم المصري تحوت و الذي لقبه اليونانيون بمثلث العظمة - Trismagistus :
و الذي بعد قراءتي لكلماته هنا ،
.. عاينت بنفسي المعنى المشهود في الآية الكريمة
( ولقد أرسلنا رسلا من قبلك منهم من قصصنا عليك ومنهم من لم نقصص عليك وما كان لرسول أن يأتي بآية إلا بإذن الله فإذا جاء أمر الله قضي بالحق وخسر هنالك المبطلون ( 78 ) ) [ ص: 419 ]
بغض النظر عن ما يطرق على رسالات هذه الرسل من تحريف او تبديل .. :
http://www.4shared.com/file/33125394/...
الكتاب بيحوي خلاصة عقيدة المصريين القدماء و فلسفتهم
او بمعنى أصح عقيدة و فلسفة الخاصة منهم ! ، فهو يحوي تعاليم سرية وضعت كي يقرأها فقط
(من يرغب آتوم في معرفتهم)
*****

الكون واحد ، و الشمس واحدة ، و القمر واحد ، و الأرض واحدة ، فهل يجوز الظن بتعدد الآلهة ؟ .. هذا محال فالإله واحد

*****

انظر الى وجودك أنت و تخيل نفسك في بلد غريب ، و ستكون هناك بفكرك كما تخيلت
فكر في المحيط و ستكون هناك ، لا لأنك سافرت فأنت لم تتحرك كما تتحرك الأشياء
حلق في السماء بلا أجنحة ، فلن يعوقك وهج الشمس أو دوران النجوم
تقدم بفكرك إلى حدود الكون إن أردت
هل يمكنك أن تشعر بالقوة التي تمتلكها ؟ .. ان استطعت ذلك ، فافعل ذلك كله ، ثم فكر من يكون باريك ، و حاول أن تفهم أن آتوم هو الفكر .. انظر كيف جمع آتوم الكون ، فكل شئ هو فكر آتوم ..

*****

إدراك آتوم شاق و تحديده مستحيل ، فلا يستطيع الناقص و الفاني إدراك الكامل و الخالدة بيسر و سهولة ، آتوم هو الواحد الصمد ، غير متحرك و مع ذلك فهو أصل الحركة ذاتها ، لا يشوبه نقص
هو الباقي دوما
هو الخالد ابدا
هو الواقع الحق ، كما أنه المطلق الأكمل الأسمى

*****

إن أردت أن تعرف كيف خلق آتوم كل شئ ، ففكر في فلاح يبذر البذور ، قمحا هنا ، و شعيرا هناك ، و شجرة عنب الآن ، و شجرة تفاح بعد ذلك

فكما يزرع الفلاح كل تلك المزروعات ، فقد غرس آتوم الخلود في السماء ، و التغير على الأرض حيث تنتشر الحياة و الحركة

*****

هل تعتقد أن آتوم خفي ؟
لا تقل ذلك ! فليس هناك ما هو أكثر وضوحا من آتوم
لقد خلق كل الأشياء بحيث تراه من خلالها
هي رحمة آتوم العظيمة التي جعلته ظاهرا في كل شئ
...
مثلما يعرف العقل بالأفكار ، يعرف آتوم بخلقه

*****
(ملحوظة : تعبت من نقل الإقتباسات)
:)
**********
اقتصرت دراسة (مقارنة الأديان) في عصرنا هذا على دراسة الأديان السماوية الثلاث ، مع الإلحاد بفروعه ، و كذا الإنسانية .. و ما الى ذلك من فلسفات و عقائد محدثة

و تغاضت تماما عن الاهتمام بالعقائد و الأديان القديمة ، رغم ما انتابها من صحوة في الفترة الأخيرة ، و التي شهدت عودة كثير من هذه الأديان و العقائد القديمة
إلى الساحة ..

و بالنسبة لي فسر اهتمامي بدراستها و القراءة فيها ، يتلخص فيما لا حظته من وحدة دعوتها جميعا ، و تشابهها الكبير مع دعوة و فلسفة الأديان السماوية
(مجرد تشابه لا تطابق ، فهناك اختلافات ، و مخالفات كثيرة طبعا)
.. و هو مايعد نقطة قوة تضاف الى تلك الأخيرة من وجهة نظري
**********
في فصول (خلق الإنسان) و (تراتب الخلق) و (مولد حضارة الإنسان) أُخذت كثيرا .. و تفتّحت روحي و نبض عقلي ، فصل (جهل الروح) كان ملئ بالحكمة
و اما عن فصل (نبوءات هيرميس) و هو الفصل الأول من الكتاب ، فهو واحد من أهم فصول الكتاب بلا شك ، و لا اعلم عما اذا كان ترتيبه في المخطوطة الأصلية الأول ايضا ام لا ..
و فيه يتنبأ تحوت او هيرميس ، بانتشار الإلحاد و المادية ، و احتقار المتدينين و اضطهادهم ، و التهوين من الفكر الديني و السخرية منه ، و البعد عن الحكمة النقية و عن طلبها بطهارة قلب و وعي ، و التشكيك في جدوى الايمان

[L Ann · Rating 4 out of 5]

My review is for the Corpus Hermeticum only as I have yet to read Asclepius.

I started reading this out of curiosity. I wanted to see how Classical Hermeticism differed from one of its later offshoots, New Thought Hermeticism as presented in The Kybalion. The three differences that stuck out the most to me were the nature of God (transcendent yet immanent vs. unknowable and abstract), the nature of the cosmos ( a living, divine being vs. a mental projection of The All), as well as what spiritual enlightenment means (mystical ascent toward Divine Nous vs. mental mastery of Hermetic principles in order to shape reality). These differences are very significant because they greatly influence the way you'd approach the subject of spirituality.

If you ask me, the world view of Classical Hermeticism aligns more fully with the Principle of Correspondence, and I like the idea of a loving and personal creator who has a will and wants what is best for humanity. In the Corpus Hermeticum, God doesn't "create" the cosmos in the same way as it is created in Christianity or Theism, it can be thought of as the natural unfolding of the Divine Mind (Nous), which emanates from the Father, or God. This creation has a hierarchical order and emphasizes that everything is in some way connected by way of the Divine spirit that is imminent in everything.

It's all very thought-provoking and beautiful, but there were a few concepts that I had a hard time accepting (or perhaps understanding).

I struggled with the idea that in order to reach spiritual enlightenment, one must completely turn away from the material world; that to be passionate about anything, even if that passion is directed toward beauty or noble causes is a hindrance. This idea isn't unique to Hermeticism. I just never understood the point of putting humans in a world full of beauty, wonder, and possibilities and then saying in order to "be good" or reach spiritual enlightenment you have to turn away from it.

"...where there is passion, there is no good to be found."

Another thing I took issue with is the text's tendency to portray humanity, and indeed the world itself, as somehow evil.

"With reference to humanity... the evil that is not excessive is the good, and the good is the least amount of evil here below. The good cannot be cleansed of vice here below, for the good is spoiled by evil here below and, once spoiled, it no longer remains good. Since it does not remain so, it becomes evil."

"mankind has been overrun by every evil, and he believes that evil is good; therefore, he uses evil the more insatiably and fears being deprived of it, striving with all his might not only to possess it but increase it. Such, Asclepius, are the good and beautiful for humans..."

That kind of absolutist language feels too harsh, especially when it seems to deny any goodness in humanity. Given that Hermeticism acknowledges the Divine as present in all things, including humanity, it seems contradictory to say mankind is entirely overrun by evil.

I suppose this can be a statement of humanity's condition and not its essence, but there were so many statements that seemed to push the idea of the material world being linked to evil that its hard to not feel like that is its message.

There is more that I could touch on, but this review is long enough, and those were my biggest issues. I am not a scholar and this isn't something I'd normally read so I may have misinterpreted a few things.These are just my initial thoughts and they are subject to change after I've had a chance to think about what I've read a little more and read the next text, Asclepius. I also plan on learning more about the significance of the 'seven governors' and the role of daemons in our spiritual journey. 3.5 stars, rounded up... though it feels weird rating this.

**While I read this, I also read the GRS Mead translation, and they were very compatible. The writing of the Mead translation reminded me of the King James Bible, but it was very beautiful, and, depending on the chapter, I'd prefer its translation to the one from Copenhaver. **

[Tracey · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have to admit I have been making may through this book for about two years but decided enough was enough it had to be finished.
I mean you can not really review this as a book as it is a series of discourses. However the translation appears to be excellent, I mean it is readable, makes sense and I certainly am not capable of doing the translation.
There is some interesting theories extolled in through out the narrative. I found the book interesting in that you are reading a person from over 2000 years ago tackling those questions that still are bandied about today. It is interesting where we have come from with our thought process and I really like that part of the book.
This is not everyone cups of tea, it is not going to mysteriously giving you the hidden meanings of life but there is enough to mull over.

[Kathy Peveler · Rating 5 out of 5]

Everything including all "Religions" are one and have been from the beginning.

[нєνєℓ ¢ανα · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the best from Ancient World...

[Heather · Rating 1 out of 5]

I just couldn't read this. I forgot how anti-body & anti-Earth most religious thought is. I don't want to ascend. I want to descend into matter.

[A. · Rating 4 out of 5]

A nice collection of late antiquity spiritual views for the curious reader.
One excerpt that I found peculiar and interesting :
"But this discourse, expressed in our paternal language, keeps clear the meaning of its words. The very quality of speech and the of Egyptian words have in themselves the energy of the object they speak of.

Therefore, my king, in so far as you have the power (who are all powerful), keep the discourse uninterpreted, lest mysteries of such greatness come to the Greeks, lest the extravagant, flaccid and (as it were) dandified Greek idiom extinguish something stately and concise, the energetic idiom of usage. For the Greeks have empty speeches, O king, that are energetic only in what they demonstrate, and this is the philosophy of the Greeks, an inane foolosophy of speeches. We, by contrast, use not speeches but sounds that are full of action."

Another one, where the sun as a center is discussed, goes as follows :
"For the sun is situated in the center of the cosmos, wearing it like a crown". (p59)
I am always pleasantly surprised to find allusions to heliocentrism 1300 years (at least) before Copernicus, whether it is allegoric or not.

[Madhab Dwibedy · Rating 1 out of 5]

bla bla bla praise god

[S.M. · Rating 2 out of 5]

Bad news for anyone electing not to have kids...you're going to Hell! Even if you have achieved a Mind and have come to realize that everything that exists on this physical plane is ultimately of no real value, that doesn't matter if you have not conscripted at least one innocent soul to physical flesh, suffering, and death against their will (and if you want salvation, possibly against yours as well) and you want to transcend into the wellspring of creation when you die. Gosh, sounds a little contradictory and cruel (and coming out of a religious book THAT'S a big shocker).

Some issues: if humans are made in the image of god, and god is perfect goodness, how can any part of our anatomy be "shameful?" Also, and I hate to break this news to anyone unaware, but we share a whole lot of the same characteristics and anatomy as even the lowliest animals (who also have their own forms of Speech and do not just simply make sounds), so, I mean, humans are not really that special. Oh yeah and god made literally everything in existence except for evil, cause that makes sense...

As with most literature of this type, you'd be wise to take it with a grain of salt (and a cup of coffee to keep you from falling asleep). Of course there's probably something of value to be found here in Hermetica for some, but I found nothing but the same old boring, sexist desert garbage. And hey, if I'm wrong then I guess I'll see y'all in Hell!

Moral: Ancient≠Wise. Two stars for the decent translation.

[Brian · Rating 5 out of 5]

One thing that quickly becomes apparent upon even a cursory perusal of the extensive endnotes Copenhaver provides to his translation of the Corpus, is that many passages permit a variety of plausible readings, making philosophical interpretation and idiomatic translation inextricably interwoven. That being said, Copenhaver's translation of the Greek and Latin source material is itself perfectly fluent, with the alternate readings in the notes often providing clarification, or at least additional routes of exegesis.
The substance of the Corpus itself is one of the best extant examples of the religious, cultural, and philosophical syncretism of the Hellenistic world, incorporating aspects of Greco-Roman, Egyptian, and possibly Judeo-Christian traditions. Questions of relative influence from among these sources are also discussed in the diligent comparative notes.
This edition is well worth perusing for anyone interested in the philosophy or religion of late antiquity, whether as a scholarly resource or simply a sample document from the ancient world for the curious reader.

[Mark · Rating 5 out of 5]

Rare is the mind that can meet the Hermetica in the middle. The profundity enclosed in each sentence comes from understanding that is as far beyond the Modernity as it is coded to confusion. For me, it is painfully difficult to unpack, but thus is the present state of the patriarchy.

One should spend months on this collection and still not plumb its depths. From the source texts, Brian P Copenhaver has recreated an exact rendition. It's an astounding work of translation.

The confusion of the Hermetica is placed further back than our oldest copies. The text itself says it is encoded. Hardly can I picture an encoded text being passed on without alteration. And then to be translated across languages. The Hermetica is truly cryptic. Truly, it is a deep sea.

[Temüjin Raizel Ṭayyi · Rating 5 out of 5]

As within, so without. As above, so below.

The quote is one of the seven principles of Hermes Trismegistus, author of Hermetic Corpus 
As Within – What we think within ourselves So Without – Will be expressed or reflected on the world we live in. As above – As in Heaven – (Your own mind) So below – So on Earth – (In your body and environment) If we think good, good will follow; if we think evil, evil will follow. Whatever we think or accept will be the circumstances of our life.

[Carlos Rendon · Rating 3 out of 5]

"Hold your tongue!"

[Shannon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Magical, magical. Will read again and again.

(Ps. I got pregnant reading this book and I don't think it was a coincidence. )

[Paul Mirek · Rating 5 out of 5]

I think it’s appropriate that my experience reading this was very much that, an active engagement that took me the better part of two years to complete. Grappling with the Hermetists’ writings in the 21st century is an exercise in two ways of being: the focused attention of the reader for which they were originally intended, and the sprawling hyperlinked consciousness with which we’re so familiar today, exemplified by Copenhaver’s copious reference notes and survey of the history of Hermetic scholarship. The trick as I see it is not so much to make a choice between the two but to consider how we might rewrite the universe if we accept the possibility of inhabiting both... “Once, in a cheap science fiction novel, Fat had come across a perfect description of the Black Iron Prison, but set in the far future. So if you superimposed the past (ancient Rome) over the present (California in the twentieth century) and superimposed the far future world of The Android Cried Me a River over that, you got the Empire, as the supra- or trans-temporal constant. Everyone who had ever lived was literally surrounded by the iron walls of the prison; they were all inside it and none of them knew it.” — Philip K. Dick, Valis

[Avery Secretname · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good book in itself with parts of wisdom that is invaluable to mankind. However, I am also reading things like the Mahābhārata and getting into Hinduism and I gotta say that Hermeticism feels like a fragmented and mutilated delivery of those ancient texts.
It’s good for what it is, but if you want the same knowledge but more complete you are better of studying the texts of ancient Bharat.

[Letícia · Rating 5 out of 5]

Esse livro mudou minha vida e minha compreensão de absolutamente tudo. Para ser relido mil vezes.

[ash ☥ · Rating 5 out of 5]

The fall of Egypt definitely points directly to Revelations

[Mark · Rating 3 out of 5]

Keep in mind all that you wish to learn, and I will teach you.

I'm shocked I finally agree with Jung on something. Normally, whenever religion is psychologized, I throw a dusty tome at the perpetrator and I wish to drink their blood. But learning about how he approached the I Ching, I see that there's actually something to be learned. Divination, as silly as it feels to us postmoderns, actually works well as a tool of self-discovery, in essence, a way to clarify the "questions" we think we want to ask, which are often just statements we don't want to acknowledge. The Hermetica begins the same way, invoking the questioner. True, one must be seeking in order to find, looking in order to see, but equally important is the gratefulness on display both at the start and the end of the book. In lieu of understanding, Hermes displays confidence in future understanding: "I shall come to know."

But what knowledge is promised here? Things started off promising enough (and poetic enough), but ended up being mostly repetitive and vague. Perhaps the most important lesson, even above the hatred of the body, is the divinity of language. Language is that which makes intelligible, and intelligence, Mind, is what creates. This parallels but diverges from the Genesis claim. It diverges insofar as the snake writing this book promises you too can become Godlike, can also join with him, perhaps even create reality like him. And it's a promise like this which sets up all the pretension of Hermeticism, with none of the fireworks.

Morality thus loses its savor. The only thing that matters is knowledge. The only way to attain that knowledge is to empty yourself of all desires, to negate the body, to become a mind in a jar. You must be silent, must be still, must become plantlike, and wait. But what if nothing comes? Or what if the voice that comes screams at you to move, or demands to "take, eat?" That's the problem with esoteric teachings: they promise secrets, but then impart precious little. At several points, other characters in the dialogue beg Hermes, the teacher, to give them the truth. But why do they trust him? And why does he repeat the same few things to them? Are they supposed to figure out the rest for themselves? And what if they arrive at the Christian God, instead of the one he intended?

Thankfully, most of the Gnostic minutia was absent, only a couple mentions of the ogdoad; largely we were spared the tedium of that though. Instead, we got a strange mixture of Eastern Orthodoxy and Buddhism:

This is the final good for those who have received knowledge: to be made god. Why do you still delay? Having learned all this, should you not become guide to the worthy so that through you the human race might be saved by god?

So there is a tension of proselytizing and keeping these secrets secret. But now that it's free on the internet, I'm not sure how secret it is, other than being unpopular, which is more obscurity than secrecy. Regardless, some small nuggets shine through.

Revolution is the same thing as motion about the same point that is held in place by immobility. Going around it prevents going beyond it...

Planets, though in constant motion, are really essentially still, because they follow a predetermined path, are slaves to an orbit. These planets are unthinking, unknowing, unenlightened, inactive (despite somehow having astrological power?). The unenlightened are apparently like this; their constant motion, constant (over)consumption tricks them into thinking that this is activity, when true activity is paradoxically only possible when inactive, when still, when silent.

Likewise, Hermes points out a strange notion of what is Good, which simulataneously feels like total depravity and possibly a reverse-Augustinian Theodicy:

The good is what is inalienable and inseparable from god, since it is god himself. All other immortal gods are given the name 'good' as an honor, but god is the good by nature, not because of honor. God has one nature - the good. In god and the good together there is but one kind, from which come all other kinds. The good is what gives everything and receives nothing; god gives everything and receives nothing; therefore, god is (the) good, and the good is god.

&

Since generation itself is subject to passion, things begotten are full of passions, but where there is passion, there is no good to be found, and, where the good is, there is not a single passion... Hence, the good cannot exist in generation; it exists only in the unbegotten.

As Christ would agree, "There is none good but God," but instead of using this as a way to damn the world, he used it to imply his oneness with God, his sharing in the goodness, which thus is a sharing of goodness with us. The entire book is like this, either anticipating the words of Christ but nearly missing, or twisting the words of Christ post facto. That's the difficult thing: we don't know how old this book is. Some claim it was written originally around the time of Moses, while scholars claim it possibly spanned from the intertestimental period to 1200 AD. Because of its distinct gnostic flavor, I'm inclined to the latter, but an earlier time range. Apparently Tertullian was familiar with it, and it lines up with what he said in "Contra Valentinius."

Corpus Hermetica (ironically so named, because it has the word "body" in the name, rather than "word" or something they would consider divine [that must be a thousands'-year-old pun, I love it]) does argue in ways that later theistic theologians often would, anticipating arguments for the necessity of a creator, as well as the immateriality of "understanding" (yet its concrete reality, because you are reading this). Ultimately, these two are among the strongest philosophical arguments against atheism and materialism respectively. But since when has rational argument ever convinced anyone of anything?

Speaking of which, many rightfully criticize theistic religion as too propositional, and rightfully so. Real religion is as much about living rightly as it is about belief. Similarly, people wrongly criticize theism, especially Christianity as "anti-body." In reality, gnosticism (sealed away in the Hermetic tradition) is anti-body, while Christianity solves the mind-body problem through the person of Christ. God himself becomes man and nullifies the distance between the body and the divine. The two share anti-body sentiments only insofar as people become obsessed with body to the neglect and even negation of the soul:

These people have sensations much like those of unreasoning animals, and, since their temperament is willful and angry, they feel no awe of things that deserve to be admired; they divert their attention to the pleasures and appetites of their bodies; and they believe that mankind came to be for such purposes.

To those who have risen above merely animal existence, this disdain for the material, the bodily, for desire, it's only natural (ironic as that sounds). But the key to mature wisdom is to move beyond this bad taste in the mouth, which Hermeticism refuses to do. It is content to hate the body rather than conquer it. As such, it not only negates the body, but also the spirit, for the body is the house of the spirit. Are you then to live in a shabby, delapidated house out of some twisted piety? Is not your body also a gift? This is where things separate. I'm inclined to mostly agree that "All the things that are subject to the sight of the eyes are as phantoms and shadowy illusions." Certainly things which can be measured are in an important sense less "real" than those which transcend measurement, but is it wise to go so far as to deny realism? The denial of the material world denies the creator, in an important sense, or at the very least implies duplicity, intentional trickery. Christianity is much more neutral to the world, granting that it has fallen but leaving open a future renewal, a World to Come, sadly rarely talked about. But this promise sets it apart from Gnosticism and offers something more beautiful.

Much of the rest of the first text in this book describes a Panentheistic god, as well as a sort of "conservation of energy/second law of thermodynamics" whereby death is not a loss, but merely a re-ordering, a shift, with the total energy in the system remaining consistent. Tied in with the former notion about God, lots of domino-like analogies are created to explain how God created the cosmos and the cosmos created man and man links back to God via knowledge (i.e. Mind, which is/can be shared with God). This is one of the formulations: "And energies are like rays from god, natural forces like rays from the cosmos, arts and learning like rays from mankind." I found the arts being lumped in with learning to be instructive, as the arts are a form of knowledge transference, albeit a very indirect and aestheticized version.

Later on, a new demand is placed on the acolyte, one which is so bold and Mayakovsky/Kirilov-like that it staggered me:

So you must think of god in this way, as having everything - the cosmos, himself, (the) universe - like thoughts within himself. Thus, unless you make yourself equal to god, you cannot understand god; like is understood by like. Make yourself grow to immeasurable immensity, outleap all body, outstrip all time, become eternity and you will understand god. Having conceived that nothing is impossible to you, consider yourself immortal and able to understand everything, all art, all learning, the temper of every living thing. Go higher than every height and lower than every depth. Collect in yourself all the sensations of what has been made, of fire and water, dry and wet;

This links back to the first quotation, about preparing one's self for illumination. The attempted equality with God feels to be antithetical to true wisdom, to true godliness, but the claim, later elaborated upon, that you become what you imitate, is a true one, a sort of imitative ontology. Imitation bleeds into consumption, a sort of internal imitation through ingestion; thus a distinction between earthly and heavenly food (a la Christ's eternal water, the eucharist, etc.) gets drawn:

The types of food are two: one for the soul, the other for the body - the two substances of which living things consist. Soul feeds on the ever restless stirring of the world. Bodies grow on water and earth, foods of the lower world.

The difference remains that Gnostics hierarchize one as more important, the other worth disdaining. But this binary feels unnecessarily sharp, unwarranted. I do agree with Hermes, however, that philosophy goes wrong when it strays from reverence for God (and instead attempts to integrate disparate branches of study). I'm unsure how this is to play out in their gnosis, in their strivings for "knowledge" (which I guess is actually a narrow term, one implying theological knowledge over and above all others?).

Things take a strange turn, and a couple seemingly paradoxical claims hang before us. First, the gender binary gets extremely blurred:

"Do you say that god is of both sexes, Trismegistus?"
"Not only god, Asclepius, but all things ensouled and soulless"

All the while heterosexual, procreative sex is held up as quasi-divine (despite literally bringing more suffering, material beings into the world??). The strangeness reaches its apex in a seeming anticipation of or acceptance of Feuerbach's attack on religion being merely a projection of divinity onto fake gods. Hermes seems not at all bothered by this, perhaps because they're lesser gods which man has created with his gift of language? Perhaps because these lesser gods don't negate the original creator God? I'm not sure:

Always mindful of its nature and origin, humanity persists in imitating divinity, representing its gods in semblance of its own features, just as the father and master made his gods eternal to resemble him.

&

...it exceeds the wonderment of all wonders that humans have been able to discover the divine nature and how to make it. Our ancestors once erred gravely on the theory of divinity; they were unbelieving and inattentive to worship and reverence for god. But then they discovered the art of making gods. To their discovery they added a conformable power arising from the nature of matter. Because they could not make souls, they mixed this power in and called up the souls of demons or angels and implanted them in likenesses through holy and divine mysteries, whence the idols could have the power to do good and evil.

Whatever we're to take from that, Hermes concludes by stating that they (and we) must "return to the care of the body. We have dealt enough with theology, and we souls have eaten our fill, so to speak." Ultimately I'm torn here. Most of the text was not nearly as poetic as they were in the first couple chapters, but is that really necessary? It helps wet a dry text, but does it add any truth to it? Probably, I would argue, per Hermes' clever lumping of "arts" with "learning." Their disdain for the body makes more cosmological sense to me, but I'm still left wondering how much morality plays into this tradition; is it merely a symptom of a rightly-ordered Mind? Is it totally optional, subjecting all to Mind? Is it necessary to avoid worldliness and ascend to the plane of Mind? A mixture of the three? Also disturbing to me was the openness of the text, open to merely looking inside for knowledge (is that not just confirmation bias/psychology?), as well as an openness to elaborate upon these teachings in whatever direction feels logical (since this text really stayed on the ground level at all times, almost never prescribing particulars).

I had hoped this would be more unhinged, more mysterious, more mystical, more poetic, but it proved rather standard, dusty, and mainstream. I guess if I want that stuff I'll have to dive deeper, but I'm not sure where.

[Ibrahim · Rating 5 out of 5]

Corpus Hermeticum 5:10 is interesting:
All things are in thee, all things come from thee; thou gives all things and receivest nothing.

[Allen McLean · Rating 5 out of 5]

The texts that have been sourced to Hermes Trismegistus in "The Corpus Hermetica" (translation by Brian P. Copenhaver) act as the foundation of a dualistic philosophical imagination/fiction.

The book's introduction is an odyssey by itself with its detailing of how the texts have passed through Eurasia, which traces back through pre-Christ prophets, Queens and Emperors. The main section is composed of over a dozen discourses on the topics of cosmology and visualization that is spoken between a number of beings, from the cosmic Mind to Hermes, and Hermes to his sons, pupils and Pharaohs. The purpose appears to be the same among them all, for the enlightened speaker to raise their listeners into the described divinity with them.

This book focuses on the working philosophies of holy prophets and beings, but discludes much of what is considered "Hermetic" due to their fragmented and untranslated natures, and to their focus on more esoteric methods and rituals of which the better known parts of the Corpus was derived from.

Philosophical/ visualizations, one/ duality forms.
https://haikuprajna.blogspot.com/2021...

[Anthony Thompson · Rating 4 out of 5]

I think this goes down as maybe the single greatest piece of prophecy to come to us from the religious labs mankind inhabited during the turning of the common era.

"Do you not know, Asclepius, that Egypt is an image of heaven, or, to speak more exactly, in Egypt all the operations of the powers which rule and work in heaven have been transferred to earth below? Nay, it should rather be said that the whole Kosmos dwells in this our land as in its sanctuary. And yet, since it is fitting that wise men should have knowledge of all events before they come to pass, you must not be left in ignorance of this: there will come a time when it will be seen that in vain have the Egyptians honored the deity with heartfelt piety and assiduous service; and all our holy worship will be found bootless and ineffectual. For the gods will return from earth to heaven; Egypt will be forsaken, and the land which was once the home of religion will be left desolate, bereft of the presence of its deities. . . .

In that day will our most holy land, this land of shrines and temples, be filled with funerals and corpses. To thee, most holy Nile, I cry, to thee I foretell that which shall be; swollen with torrents of blood, thou wilt rise to the level of thy banks, and thy sacred waves will be not only stained, but utterly fouled with gore. Do you weep at this, Asclepius? There is worse to come; Egypt herself will have yet more to suffer; she will fall into a far more piteous plight, and will be infected with yet more grievous plagues; . . . The dead will far outnumber the living; and the survivors will be known for Egyptians by their tongue alone, but in their actions they will seem to be men of another race.

O Egypt, Egypt, of thy religion nothing will remain but an empty tale, which thine own children in time to come will not believe; nothing will be left but graven words, and only the stones will tell of thy piety. And in that day men will be weary of life, and they will cease to think the universe worthy of reverent wonder and of worship. And so religion, the greatest of all blessings — for there is nothing, nor has been, nor ever shall be, that can be deemed a greater boon — will be threatened with destruction; men will think it a burden, and will come to scorn it. They will no longer love this world around us, this incomparable work of God, this glorious structure which he has built, this sum of good made up of things of many diverse forms, this instrument whereby the will of God operates in that which he has made, ungrudgingly favoring man's welfare, this combination and accumulation of all the manifold things that can call forth the veneration, praise, and love of the beholder. Darkness will be preferred to light, and death will be thought more profitable than life; no one will raise his eyes to heaven; the pious will be deemed insane, and the impious wise; the madman will be thought a brave man, and the wicked will be esteemed as good.

As to the soul, and the belief that it is immortal by nature, or may hope to attain to immortality, as I have taught you — all this they will mock at, and will even persuade themselves that it is false. No word of reverence or piety, no utterance worthy of heaven and of the gods of heaven, will be heard or believed.

And so the gods will depart from mankind — a grievous thing! — and only evil angels will remain, who will mingle with men, and drive the poor wretches by main force into all manner of reckless crime, into wars, and robberies, and frauds, and all things hostile to the nature of the soul. Then will the earth no longer stand unshaken, and the sea will bear no ships; heaven will not support the stars in their orbits, nor will the stars pursue their constant course in heaven; all voices of the gods will of necessity be silenced and dumb; the fruits of the earth will rot; the soil will turn barren, and the very air will sicken in sullen stagnation. After this manner will old age come upon the world. Religion will be no more; all things will be disordered and awry; all good will disappear.

But when all this has befallen, Asclepius, then the Master and Father, God, the first before all, the maker of that god who first came into being, will look on that which has come to pass, and will stay the disorder by the counterworking of his will, which is the good. He will call back to the right path those who have gone astray; he will cleanse the world from evil, now washing it away with waterfloods, now burning it out with fiercest fire, or again expelling it by war and pestilence. And thus he will bring back his world to its former aspect, so that the Kosmos will once more be deemed worthy of worship and wondering reverence, and God, the maker and restorer of the mighty fabric, will be adored by the men of that day with unceasing hymns of praise and blessing. Such is the new birth of the Kosmos; it is a making again of all things good, a holy and awe-striking restoration of all nature; and it is wrought in the process of time by the eternal will of God.

For God's will has no beginning; it is ever the same, and as it now is, even so it has ever been, without beginning."

This isn't my first time reading the Hermetica, though it is my first time with this translation. It's a wonderful theology that sounds Egyptian/Hebrew/Hellenistic when you read it, but theologically lines up almost perfectly with many Hindu interpretations.

It's good stuff.

[Conor Fogarty · Rating 4 out of 5]

A unique spiritual vision which transitions into a pre-scientific treatise. This book is more remarkable for, as Copenhaver suggests, despite the complex dialogues and illustrative imagery, not only is this text not a product of modern pseudo-scientific literature, but is in fact an ancient text which inspired the progenitors of modern science and humanism.

[Christopher Redfern · Rating 3 out of 5]

Difficult to read and rate if you are not a philologist or religious scholar. A whole lot of distant and forbidding statements which need illumination from other historical sources to be understood

[James Dempsey · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thank you Hermeticus for your wisdom of old, and to the learned Facino, translator to Cosimo de Medici, for rendering this ancient knowledge accessible then as much as to Brian Copenhaver for rendering it such today. I will study the word of the Hermetica with a beady eye as I conclude the festive season and embark to meet with Janus in the new year; restrained, meditative, and sober - I will hum to myself the tunes of hermeticus as I attempt to sift my way through the blackened and unsung wood of Dry January. Coram deo.

“Where are you heading in your drunkenness, you people? Have you swallowed the doctrine of ignorance undiluted, vomiting it up already because you cannot hold it? Stop and sober yourselves up! Look up with the eyes of the heart - if not all of you, at least those of you who have the power. The vice of ignorance floods the whole earth and utterly destroys the soul shut up in the body, preventing it from anchoring in the havens of deliverance. [2] Surely you will not sink in this great flood? Those of you who can will take the ebb and gain the haven of deliverance and anchor there. Then, seek a guide to take you by the hand and lead you to the portals of knowledge. There shines the light cleansed of darkness. There no one is drunk. 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. But first you must rip off the tunic that you wear, the garment of ignorance, the foundation of vice, the bonds of corruption, the dark cage, the living death, the sentient corpse, the portable tomb, the resident thief, the one
who hates through what he loves and envies through what he hates.”

“Such is the odious tunic you have put on. It strangles you and drags you down with it so that you will not hate its viciousness, not look up and see the fair vision of truth and the good that lies within, not understand the plot that it has plotted against you when it made insensible the organs of sense, made them inapparent and unrecognized for what they are, blocked up with a great load of matter and jammed full of loathsome pleasure, so that you do not hear what you must hear nor observe what you must observe.

[Jude Arnold · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read a different version of the many books entitled the Hermetica. The subtitle of the one I read is The Lost Wisdom of the Pharaohs. It is written by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy.
More Esoteric Writings from Hermes Attributed to Thoth.
Both ancient Egyptian wisdom, The Hermetica, a forgotten spiritual classic, is related to The Kybalion but totally different and equally fascinating.
The Introduction includes a very interesting History of Paganism and how it affected Islam, Sufis, the Renaissance and early Christianity.
At the heart of the teaching is one simple idea - God, called Atun, is a Big Mind.
The Cosmos is a living being, teeming with life.
Time is an illusion we must free ourselves from.
Even the present does not exist.
The Sun, a god called Ra, continuously pours forth Light and Life.
Human beings become civilized under the guidance of the god Osiris and goddess Isis.
Hermes explains how the Zodiac controls the fate of men and makes each individual member of the human species unique.
Further revelations include how souls incarnate into physical bodies, the nature of death and how the soul survives it.
The purpose of human life is to come to know Atun and to cease being enslaved by the body.
Through spiritual rebirth we awaken to our immortal soul.

[Emily Bacula · Rating 5 out of 5]

One thing that quickly becomes apparent upon even a cursory perusal of the extensive endnotes Copenhaver provides to his translation of the Corpus, is that many passages permit a variety of plausible readings, making philosophical interpretation and idiomatic translation inextricably interwoven. That being said, Copenhaver's translation of the Greek and Latin source material is itself perfectly fluent, with the alternate readings in the notes often providing clarification, or at least additional routes of exegesis.

The substance of the Corpus itself is one of the best extant examples of the spiritual, cultural, and philosophical syncretism of the Hellenistic world, incorporating aspects of Greco-Roman, Egyptian, and possibly pre-Judeo-Christian traditions. Questions of relative influence from among these sources are also discussed in the diligent comparative notes.

This edition is well worth perusing for anyone interested in the philosophy or religion of late antiquity, whether as a scholarly resource or simply a sample document from the ancient world for the curious reader.

[Ronald Patrick Marriott · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not just the Egyptian society but the planet now. The makers of that time period and their wonderful creation understood how the universe was created and parallel universes which they traveled in. They left us a message in the form of the Giza pyramid complex and messages written in stone in the hopes that earths future societies will return to the coexistence with the universe in peace and light. The Santorini volcano erupted sending a tsunami down the Nile river shifting the river away from the pyramid complex rendering the pyramids useless and removing the ability for these destructive societies from entering into our parallel universes where harmony could effect the rest of the universe.