alexandreteles/alexandria · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 0 127k

Again, Christ the Logos is the Way. He is our Path to God, both on the Light-side of things and on the Substance-side; either as a Lamp, or that for which the pure mind looks, or a Way, that on which the feet walk. In either case the Christ is that which leads to God.

The ceremony again changes with the words: "Now answer to My dancing."

All now may be believed to be taking place within the Master-Presence. Union of substance has been attained, but not yet union of consciousness. Before that final mystery can be consummated,the knowledge of the Passion of Man, that is of the Great Passion or perpetual experience of the Great Act, must be achieved.

The soul is to gaze upon the mystery as upon its own Passion. The perfected soul can gaze upon the mystery in peace; as yet, however, the soul of the aspirant is not perfected in gnosis, but in substance only, so that it may feel the Great Passion in itself, and yet as apart from itself.

Hereupon in the lower rite, the mystery-drama, the Passion of Man, must have been shown. What it may have been is not easy to conjecture; it must, however, have been something of a most distressing nature, for the neophyte is moved or shaken completely--that is to say,unnerved. He had not the strength of perfect faith in the Power of the Master; for, presumably, he saw that very Master dismembered before his eyes, or becoming many from one, or in some way done to death.

After the Passion-drama or Passion-vision comes the instruction; for in such rites--such passions or experiences for the sake of knowing--there must be the actual experience in feeling before there can be gnosis.

This knowledge is given by the Master Himself, the Logos in man: Wherefore it needs must be the lover should first behold the Beloved suffering.

And then follow the comfortable words: "I am a couch; rest thou upon Me." For the Suffering Christ is but the translation into manifestation in time and space of the Triumphant Eternal Christ, the Æon. It is here that that mystery of Docetism, of what the Vedânta calls Mâyâ, receives a philosophical meaning. This mystery is suggested in many a logos; but here I will quote only from the Trismegistic sermon called "The Inner Door" (T.G.H., iii. 275):

"And being so minded and so ordering his life, he shall behold the Son of God becoming all things for holy souls, that he may draw her (the soul) forth from out the region of the Fate into the Incorporeal.

"For having power in all, He becometh all things, whatsoever He will; and in obedience to the Father's nod, through the whole Body doth He penetrate, and pouring forth His Light into the mind of every soul. He starts it back into the Blessed Region, where it was before it had become corporeal--following after Him, and led by Him into the Light."

"Who I am thou shalt know when I depart."

This and the two following sentences seem to suggest--that is, if we may venture to believe that there was true vision of an inner mystery accompanying the outer drama--some such idea as this.

The substantial nature of the Presence, the Body, so to speak, of atmosphere, which may have been seen--with some suggestion of an idea of human form as its "pillar" or "support," and at the same time of a sphere or completeness holding it together--this, says the Master, is not my true Self. I am not this Mirror of the World, I am not this Word or Living Symbol which contains the whole world, and also stamps it with meaning and idea. What the nature of the real Christ is thou shalt know when thou comest, or becomest Him.

"If thou hadst known how to suffer."

The sentences so beginning are perhaps the most pregnant in meaning in the whole of this marvellous ritual. It seems in one sense (for there are infinite meanings) to signify: If the substance of your body had really known how to dance, and so been able to respond exactly to My Passion (that is, the manifestation in activity of real life and consciousness), then you would have had the power to have kept stable about the Mystic Centre, and not have been dragged back into your body of suffering, or in-harmony; you would not have been dragged back onto the dramatic side of things and been swamped by the drama.

"That which thou knowest not, I Myself will teach thee."

That which the soul unaided cannot know, the Master will teach. That is to say, presumably: This Power or Presence is a link between your own "body" or atmosphere and the realities of Great Things.

As soon as the sphere-"body" (the psychic envelope of normal man is said to be ellipse, egg-shaped, imperfect) is capable of dancing, the Power of the Master will stamp it with meaning. The little self cannot do this. The Power is not connected with little things. It comes from the greater worlds as a natural result of the perfect dancing of the substances of all man's "bodies."

"I am thy God, not the Betrayer's." Taken in connection with the introductory words before our Hymn, this will probably suggest to most readers the thought of Judas. But the Gnostics moved in a wider circle of ideas.

The Betrayer is rather the lawless Serpent, the Kakodaimôn, that which hands the soul over to the bodies of death--a mystery that is not touched upon in our ritual.

"I would be kept in time with holy souls."

This sentence appears to me to be misplaced. One of its meanings seems to be that as the soul watches the Dance, it prays to be brought into harmony with "Holy Souls"; that is to have its consciousness and form brought into such perfect relationship as to become one. Then the little soul would become a Great Soul or Master, a Perfect or Balanced Soul.

The concluding sentences are evidently drawn from two different traditions of the original text; they are two separate endings copied down one after the other. It is thus to be conjectured that there were several variants of this ritual, and that it was, therefore, widely known and used in Gnostic circles.

It must, however, have been at first kept very secret, for later on in the text of our fragment we read the injunction of the Master to John:

"That Passion which I showed unto thee and unto the rest in the Dance, I will that it be called a mystery."

Can it be that in the the original form, it was John, the Beloved himself, who was the candidate?

It may have been so; but even if so, "John" would not be understood by a Gnostic to be the name of one single historical character. There had been, there were, and there would be many Johns.

From the Twelve Three; and from the Three One.

For just as we find that there were Three--Peter, James and John--who were nearest the Lord in His Great Moments, so also do we find in the Johannine tradition that of these Three, it was John who was nearest to Him in His Great Acts.

Moreover, just as in the Trismegistic tradition we find that out of the Three--Ammon, Asclepius and Tat--it is Tat, the most spiritual of the disciples, who succeeds his "Father," Thrice-greatest Hermes, when He is taken to the Gods; so also do we find in the Johannine tradition that it is John who succeeds Jesus when He ascends to the Father of all "Fathers."

"Father" was the technical name of the Master, or Initiator, and the Head of the community.

And so, in a codex of the Fourth Gospel, preserved in the archives of the Templars of St. John of Jerusalem, in Paris--that is to say in all probability in a document that belonged to those who came into contact with the Johannine tradition in the East--we find (Thilo, Code. Apoc. N.T., p. 880) the following additions which are absent from the Textus Receptus.

To John, xvii. 26:

"Amen, I say unto you, I am not of this world; but John shall be your Father, till he shall go with Me into Paradise. And He anointed them with the Holy Spirit."

And to John, xix. 26-30:

"He saith to His Mother: Weep not; I go to My Father and to Eternal Life. Behold Thy Son. He will keep My place.

"Then saith He to the Disciple: Behold thy Mother!

"Then bowing His Head He breathed forth His Spirit."

But if it be willed that that which "I showed unto thee . . . in the Dance" be "called a mystery," it must equally be willed that it be kept a mystery.

I therefore offer my surmises on the altar of the Outer Court, though hardly venturing to think they will be regarded as reasonable oblations to the Great Presence by many of the Many who serve there.

I would, however, venture to hope that I have at least established a strong presumption that the Hymn of Jesus is no hymn, but a very early Christian mystery-ritual, and perhaps the oldest Christian ritual of any kind preserved to us.
accelerate==0.30.1 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"
aiohttp==3.9.5 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"
aiosignal==1.3.1 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"
annotated-types==0.7.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"
anyio==4.4.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"
appnope==0.1.4 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12" and platform_system == "Darwin"
argon2-cffi-bindings==21.2.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"
argon2-cffi==23.1.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"
arrow==1.3.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"
asttokens==2.4.1 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"
async-lru==2.0.4 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"
attrs==23.2.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"
babel==2.15.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"
backoff==2.2.1 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"
beautifulsoup4==4.12.3 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"
bleach==6.1.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"
certifi==2024.2.2 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"
cffi==1.16.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

Again, Christ the Logos is the Way. He is our Path to God, both on the Light-side of things and on the Substance-side; either as a Lamp, or that for which the pure mind looks, or a Way, that on which the feet walk. In either case the Christ is that which leads to God.

The ceremony again changes with the words: "Now answer to My dancing."

All now may be believed to be taking place within the Master-Presence. Union of substance has been attained, but not yet union of consciousness. Before that final mystery can be consummated,the knowledge of the Passion of Man, that is of the Great Passion or perpetual experience of the Great Act, must be achieved.

The soul is to gaze upon the mystery as upon its own Passion. The perfected soul can gaze upon the mystery in peace; as yet, however, the soul of the aspirant is not perfected in gnosis, but in substance only, so that it may feel the Great Passion in itself, and yet as apart from itself.

Hereupon in the lower rite, the mystery-drama, the Passion of Man, must have been shown. What it may have been is not easy to conjecture; it must, however, have been something of a most distressing nature, for the neophyte is moved or shaken completely--that is to say,unnerved. He had not the strength of perfect faith in the Power of the Master; for, presumably, he saw that very Master dismembered before his eyes, or becoming many from one, or in some way done to death.

After the Passion-drama or Passion-vision comes the instruction; for in such rites--such passions or experiences for the sake of knowing--there must be the actual experience in feeling before there can be gnosis.

This knowledge is given by the Master Himself, the Logos in man: Wherefore it needs must be the lover should first behold the Beloved suffering.

And then follow the comfortable words: "I am a couch; rest thou upon Me." For the Suffering Christ is but the translation into manifestation in time and space of the Triumphant Eternal Christ, the Æon. It is here that that mystery of Docetism, of what the Vedânta calls Mâyâ, receives a philosophical meaning. This mystery is suggested in many a logos; but here I will quote only from the Trismegistic sermon called "The Inner Door" (T.G.H., iii. 275):

"And being so minded and so ordering his life, he shall behold the Son of God becoming all things for holy souls, that he may draw her (the soul) forth from out the region of the Fate into the Incorporeal.

"For having power in all, He becometh all things, whatsoever He will; and in obedience to the Father's nod, through the whole Body doth He penetrate, and pouring forth His Light into the mind of every soul. He starts it back into the Blessed Region, where it was before it had become corporeal--following after Him, and led by Him into the Light."

"Who I am thou shalt know when I depart."

This and the two following sentences seem to suggest--that is, if we may venture to believe that there was true vision of an inner mystery accompanying the outer drama--some such idea as this.

The substantial nature of the Presence, the Body, so to speak, of atmosphere, which may have been seen--with some suggestion of an idea of human form as its "pillar" or "support," and at the same time of a sphere or completeness holding it together--this, says the Master, is not my true Self. I am not this Mirror of the World, I am not this Word or Living Symbol which contains the whole world, and also stamps it with meaning and idea. What the nature of the real Christ is thou shalt know when thou comest, or becomest Him.

"If thou hadst known how to suffer."

The sentences so beginning are perhaps the most pregnant in meaning in the whole of this marvellous ritual. It seems in one sense (for there are infinite meanings) to signify: If the substance of your body had really known how to dance, and so been able to respond exactly to My Passion (that is, the manifestation in activity of real life and consciousness), then you would have had the power to have kept stable about the Mystic Centre, and not have been dragged back into your body of suffering, or in-harmony; you would not have been dragged back onto the dramatic side of things and been swamped by the drama.

"That which thou knowest not, I Myself will teach thee."

That which the soul unaided cannot know, the Master will teach. That is to say, presumably: This Power or Presence is a link between your own "body" or atmosphere and the realities of Great Things.

As soon as the sphere-"body" (the psychic envelope of normal man is said to be ellipse, egg-shaped, imperfect) is capable of dancing, the Power of the Master will stamp it with meaning. The little self cannot do this. The Power is not connected with little things. It comes from the greater worlds as a natural result of the perfect dancing of the substances of all man's "bodies."

"I am thy God, not the Betrayer's." Taken in connection with the introductory words before our Hymn, this will probably suggest to most readers the thought of Judas. But the Gnostics moved in a wider circle of ideas.

The Betrayer is rather the lawless Serpent, the Kakodaimôn, that which hands the soul over to the bodies of death--a mystery that is not touched upon in our ritual.

"I would be kept in time with holy souls."

This sentence appears to me to be misplaced. One of its meanings seems to be that as the soul watches the Dance, it prays to be brought into harmony with "Holy Souls"; that is to have its consciousness and form brought into such perfect relationship as to become one. Then the little soul would become a Great Soul or Master, a Perfect or Balanced Soul.

The concluding sentences are evidently drawn from two different traditions of the original text; they are two separate endings copied down one after the other. It is thus to be conjectured that there were several variants of this ritual, and that it was, therefore, widely known and used in Gnostic circles.

It must, however, have been at first kept very secret, for later on in the text of our fragment we read the injunction of the Master to John:

"That Passion which I showed unto thee and unto the rest in the Dance, I will that it be called a mystery."

Can it be that in the the original form, it was John, the Beloved himself, who was the candidate?

It may have been so; but even if so, "John" would not be understood by a Gnostic to be the name of one single historical character. There had been, there were, and there would be many Johns.

From the Twelve Three; and from the Three One.

For just as we find that there were Three--Peter, James and John--who were nearest the Lord in His Great Moments, so also do we find in the Johannine tradition that of these Three, it was John who was nearest to Him in His Great Acts.

Moreover, just as in the Trismegistic tradition we find that out of the Three--Ammon, Asclepius and Tat--it is Tat, the most spiritual of the disciples, who succeeds his "Father," Thrice-greatest Hermes, when He is taken to the Gods; so also do we find in the Johannine tradition that it is John who succeeds Jesus when He ascends to the Father of all "Fathers."

"Father" was the technical name of the Master, or Initiator, and the Head of the community.

And so, in a codex of the Fourth Gospel, preserved in the archives of the Templars of St. John of Jerusalem, in Paris--that is to say in all probability in a document that belonged to those who came into contact with the Johannine tradition in the East--we find (Thilo, Code. Apoc. N.T., p. 880) the following additions which are absent from the Textus Receptus.

To John, xvii. 26:

"Amen, I say unto you, I am not of this world; but John shall be your Father, till he shall go with Me into Paradise. And He anointed them with the Holy Spirit."

And to John, xix. 26-30:

"He saith to His Mother: Weep not; I go to My Father and to Eternal Life. Behold Thy Son. He will keep My place.

"Then saith He to the Disciple: Behold thy Mother!

"Then bowing His Head He breathed forth His Spirit."

But if it be willed that that which "I showed unto thee . . . in the Dance" be "called a mystery," it must equally be willed that it be kept a mystery.

I therefore offer my surmises on the altar of the Outer Court, though hardly venturing to think they will be regarded as reasonable oblations to the Great Presence by many of the Many who serve there.

I would, however, venture to hope that I have at least established a strong presumption that the Hymn of Jesus is no hymn, but a very early Christian mystery-ritual, and perhaps the oldest Christian ritual of any kind preserved to us.

accelerate==0.30.1 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

aiohttp==3.9.5 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

aiosignal==1.3.1 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

annotated-types==0.7.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

anyio==4.4.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

appnope==0.1.4 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12" and platform_system == "Darwin"

argon2-cffi-bindings==21.2.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

argon2-cffi==23.1.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

arrow==1.3.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

asttokens==2.4.1 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

async-lru==2.0.4 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

attrs==23.2.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

babel==2.15.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

backoff==2.2.1 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

beautifulsoup4==4.12.3 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

bleach==6.1.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

certifi==2024.2.2 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"

cffi==1.16.0 ; python_version >= "3.11" and python_version < "3.12"