Gnostic reflections...
wildchilde
Cerulean, I cannot thank you enough for beginning this thread! I apologize that you have felt “ignored” as I have greatly enjoyed your posts, my tardiness in responding is simply limited to the great amount of wonderful information you have provided and my own limitations as to absorbing, understanding, and formulating an appropriate response. There is so much food for ‘thought’ here that it is difficult to know where to begin…
For me, the most important documentation you have provided in explaining the symbol of the Rose (and the archetypal image of the Goddess) is the article on this website: http://www.whitedragon.org.uk/articles/rose.htm . This article gives much of the historical background of the Rose and its true (and manifold) meaning. Personally, I do believe that the Tarot was a clandestine tool created to pass down not only the allegorical teachings of Gnosticism (of which roots can be found all over the world) but also the “Inner Mysteries” of the “Divine Lovers” (1 and 0, see comments below).
The link between the Language of the Birds and the Romance of the Rose is definite and infinite (as far as I’m concerned) and it is clear in studies of Gnosticism that there were considered to be three levels of “understanding” the Divine Mysteries…The Hylic State (identification of Self in “materialistic” or bodily terms), the Psychic State (identification of Self with the “psyche” or soul), and the Pneumatic State (awareness of Self as “self-less” or Divine Consciousness), the passing through of these stages which leads to the realization of Gnosis (or in other terms the Fourth Stage of “Divine Marriage”). This marriage, in each of its stages of understanding, a reflection of the Cosmic Divine Marriage of the Son and the Sophia (God and Goddess for lack of better terms). To the Gnostics (and I might add Indegenous Peoples worldwide from which the Gnostics drew much of their teachings), this is the true meaning of As Above, So Below…that human existence is a reflection of the Cosmic existence.
One thing I have found most interesting in my study of Gnosticism is that in their Creation Myths the Gnostics state that out of the original 4 Aeons (Sacred Beings…which in fact were the Son and the Divine Sophia as androgynous beings, meaning they each had “two sides” which would total 4), there were a total of 22 Aeons created. This, to me, is the origin of the Major Arcana. And I think upon reading your information regarding the “Romance Age” poetry that the “allegorical” information encoded is a part of the initiation process…the depth of understanding of the symbols of the Tarot being dependent on what stage the “Initiate” (as well as the querent) is operating from. For example, the list of “allegorical personifications” you so graciously provided (with the possible exception of ‘The God of Love’) would all be based in the Hylic Stage (identification with material/bodily existence)…however deeper meanings of these allegories are present within the symbols used which lead to the archetypal Aeons.
As an aside, here’s another mathematical computation…22 x 2 (because all the Aeons were androgynous and therefore had two sides, masculine and feminine) is 44, add in the principal 8 Aeons (the “4” Aeons, noted above, which created the next “4”out of them) and you have “52”, 52 + 22=74. 74+4 (symbolizing the elemental powers)=78. All of which will lead back to the Zero (infinity) the Great Mystery for whence all comes forth. So it is here that I have drawn the conclusion that the cards of the Tarot are representative of the Aeons of Gnosticsm (NB, historically speaking, where Gnosticism is a combination of many “mystical teaching” modalities from many differing ancient Peoples) and they do hold the “keys” to enlightenment of each of the 4 levels of “understanding”, again each dependent on the level of “initiation” of reader and querent. Going along with this theme is the Binary Code (that which we are using mathematically to communicate on this forum and via the internet)…the Binary Code is the combination of the “1” and the “0”. In the Gnostic teachings, all things Cosmically come from this combination…the “1”/male coming together with the “0”/female and therefore “reproducing” (or maybe more apt ‘replicating’) which was the beginning of the generation of the archetypes (or Aeons).
Moving back to your posts on the symbology of the Rose, and the Language of the Birds, both of these symbols are Mythologically linked to the encoded understanding of the Divine Feminine and further still the combination of the Divine Feminine with the Divine Masculine which lead back to the “Divine Mystery” (infinity).
The difficulty in understanding the depths of the allegorical meanings, I think, of the Tarot symbology is the generational “fracturing” of these Divine Archetypes. For example, the Mythology of the Greeks and Romans, deliberately fractures (splits apart) the fullness of the Divine Feminine, weakening the power of the Archetypal symbols throughout the ages to where at this point the majority of humankind has little to no understanding of the Divine Feminine in all “her” Glory, which was as an androgynous creation, (cosmically) joined to another androgynous creation. The focus since the time of the “Age of Romance” has been mostly relegated to the ‘incarnation’ of the Divine Feminine as Venus/Aphrodite “the Goddess of Love”, when in fact, the whole Divine Feminine is the “Goddess of Life” in all stages (birth, life, death, and rebirth—where again we see the powerful symbology of the “4”). Most people when they look at Venus/Aphrodite see her from the “Hylic” stage of initiation, but there are others who can see past the “fractured” image to the other parts or even the whole of the Divine Feminine.
Now, after having blathered on about all this, if you go back to the “Roman de la Rose” and re-read the passages, substituting these words as follows:
“dream” (Divine Consciousness; representative of the Divine Masculine)
“good and evil” (light and dark; 1 and 0)
“Love” (Divine Life; representative of the Divine Feminine)
“Art of Love” (Great Mystery—The One God (of Love)—representative of the Divine Marriage)
“Romance of the Rose” (the Divine Marriage)
“Rose” (Divine Feminine)
Depending on the level of “initiation” of the reader, you may well see the deeper meaning to the poetry/symbology encoded within the words. This is the Language of the Birds (the revealing of the combination of the Divine Feminine and the Divine Masculine in Sacred Marriage). Reportedly Jesus said, “let those with the ears to hear, hear”…speaking of the ear that has been opened by the Divine Feminine (sometimes symbolized as a bird) to hear the messages of Divine Life and Divine Love.
****
Whew! Okay…if you have not fallen asleep yet or gone on about the other posts of the forum, thank you for reading this and for allowing me to share what little I have gleaned so far on this path. My disclaimer being that I claim no special knowledge/understanding of any of this as a ‘mere mortal being’ and therefore welcome any and all comments, revisions, or further discussion. Thanks again, Cerulean for this wonderful post…I hope that the ramblings of this Fool have not taken you or anyone else away from the Beauty of your original posts.
For me, the most important documentation you have provided in explaining the symbol of the Rose (and the archetypal image of the Goddess) is the article on this website: http://www.whitedragon.org.uk/articles/rose.htm . This article gives much of the historical background of the Rose and its true (and manifold) meaning. Personally, I do believe that the Tarot was a clandestine tool created to pass down not only the allegorical teachings of Gnosticism (of which roots can be found all over the world) but also the “Inner Mysteries” of the “Divine Lovers” (1 and 0, see comments below).
The link between the Language of the Birds and the Romance of the Rose is definite and infinite (as far as I’m concerned) and it is clear in studies of Gnosticism that there were considered to be three levels of “understanding” the Divine Mysteries…The Hylic State (identification of Self in “materialistic” or bodily terms), the Psychic State (identification of Self with the “psyche” or soul), and the Pneumatic State (awareness of Self as “self-less” or Divine Consciousness), the passing through of these stages which leads to the realization of Gnosis (or in other terms the Fourth Stage of “Divine Marriage”). This marriage, in each of its stages of understanding, a reflection of the Cosmic Divine Marriage of the Son and the Sophia (God and Goddess for lack of better terms). To the Gnostics (and I might add Indegenous Peoples worldwide from which the Gnostics drew much of their teachings), this is the true meaning of As Above, So Below…that human existence is a reflection of the Cosmic existence.
One thing I have found most interesting in my study of Gnosticism is that in their Creation Myths the Gnostics state that out of the original 4 Aeons (Sacred Beings…which in fact were the Son and the Divine Sophia as androgynous beings, meaning they each had “two sides” which would total 4), there were a total of 22 Aeons created. This, to me, is the origin of the Major Arcana. And I think upon reading your information regarding the “Romance Age” poetry that the “allegorical” information encoded is a part of the initiation process…the depth of understanding of the symbols of the Tarot being dependent on what stage the “Initiate” (as well as the querent) is operating from. For example, the list of “allegorical personifications” you so graciously provided (with the possible exception of ‘The God of Love’) would all be based in the Hylic Stage (identification with material/bodily existence)…however deeper meanings of these allegories are present within the symbols used which lead to the archetypal Aeons.
As an aside, here’s another mathematical computation…22 x 2 (because all the Aeons were androgynous and therefore had two sides, masculine and feminine) is 44, add in the principal 8 Aeons (the “4” Aeons, noted above, which created the next “4”out of them) and you have “52”, 52 + 22=74. 74+4 (symbolizing the elemental powers)=78. All of which will lead back to the Zero (infinity) the Great Mystery for whence all comes forth. So it is here that I have drawn the conclusion that the cards of the Tarot are representative of the Aeons of Gnosticsm (NB, historically speaking, where Gnosticism is a combination of many “mystical teaching” modalities from many differing ancient Peoples) and they do hold the “keys” to enlightenment of each of the 4 levels of “understanding”, again each dependent on the level of “initiation” of reader and querent. Going along with this theme is the Binary Code (that which we are using mathematically to communicate on this forum and via the internet)…the Binary Code is the combination of the “1” and the “0”. In the Gnostic teachings, all things Cosmically come from this combination…the “1”/male coming together with the “0”/female and therefore “reproducing” (or maybe more apt ‘replicating’) which was the beginning of the generation of the archetypes (or Aeons).
Moving back to your posts on the symbology of the Rose, and the Language of the Birds, both of these symbols are Mythologically linked to the encoded understanding of the Divine Feminine and further still the combination of the Divine Feminine with the Divine Masculine which lead back to the “Divine Mystery” (infinity).
The difficulty in understanding the depths of the allegorical meanings, I think, of the Tarot symbology is the generational “fracturing” of these Divine Archetypes. For example, the Mythology of the Greeks and Romans, deliberately fractures (splits apart) the fullness of the Divine Feminine, weakening the power of the Archetypal symbols throughout the ages to where at this point the majority of humankind has little to no understanding of the Divine Feminine in all “her” Glory, which was as an androgynous creation, (cosmically) joined to another androgynous creation. The focus since the time of the “Age of Romance” has been mostly relegated to the ‘incarnation’ of the Divine Feminine as Venus/Aphrodite “the Goddess of Love”, when in fact, the whole Divine Feminine is the “Goddess of Life” in all stages (birth, life, death, and rebirth—where again we see the powerful symbology of the “4”). Most people when they look at Venus/Aphrodite see her from the “Hylic” stage of initiation, but there are others who can see past the “fractured” image to the other parts or even the whole of the Divine Feminine.
Now, after having blathered on about all this, if you go back to the “Roman de la Rose” and re-read the passages, substituting these words as follows:
“dream” (Divine Consciousness; representative of the Divine Masculine)
“good and evil” (light and dark; 1 and 0)
“Love” (Divine Life; representative of the Divine Feminine)
“Art of Love” (Great Mystery—The One God (of Love)—representative of the Divine Marriage)
“Romance of the Rose” (the Divine Marriage)
“Rose” (Divine Feminine)
Depending on the level of “initiation” of the reader, you may well see the deeper meaning to the poetry/symbology encoded within the words. This is the Language of the Birds (the revealing of the combination of the Divine Feminine and the Divine Masculine in Sacred Marriage). Reportedly Jesus said, “let those with the ears to hear, hear”…speaking of the ear that has been opened by the Divine Feminine (sometimes symbolized as a bird) to hear the messages of Divine Life and Divine Love.
****
Whew! Okay…if you have not fallen asleep yet or gone on about the other posts of the forum, thank you for reading this and for allowing me to share what little I have gleaned so far on this path. My disclaimer being that I claim no special knowledge/understanding of any of this as a ‘mere mortal being’ and therefore welcome any and all comments, revisions, or further discussion. Thanks again, Cerulean for this wonderful post…I hope that the ramblings of this Fool have not taken you or anyone else away from the Beauty of your original posts.
jmd
The Romance of the Rose is one of those texts I have frequently come across in reference especially in influence in the closing days of the 15th century (even though it was then 300 years old), and have yet to read...
The references, however, leave it quite unlikely that it had direct influence on the development of the Tarot - yet a good and careful study, which in any case can only bring us ever closer to also the important influences of the period, is indeed worthy.
With regards to the Aeons and Gnosticism in general, I once looked through especially the important Apocryphon of John, which possibly dates from around the same time as the early appearance of the Sefer Yetzirah, ie, the 2nd century, and simply and personally could not find how the Atouts arise or reflect the particular Gnosticism there depicted. This does not of course mean it does not, and rather only points to my own slow and progressive move away from Gnostic influence (rather than gnostic influence) in the places and times of Tarot emergence.
The correspondence between such Gnosticism, early Merkabah or Kabalah, and the ways in which some of the later spiritual Alchemical and the syncretic impulses of the Occidental traditions merge speaks volumes of overlapping influences and reflection.
A useful place to also have a look at gnostic materials is a site began and co-organised by an old university friend of mine (M. Alan Kazlev): http://www.kheper.net/.
This does not take away from seeing the sequence and whole of the Tarot as indeed displaying an integrative sequence or whole. Personally, I do see it as such as well - but as to the influence of what appears to be that wonderful and important Romance of the Rose, it seems more to have played into the French national ethos than the specific illuminations of the Tarot.
The references, however, leave it quite unlikely that it had direct influence on the development of the Tarot - yet a good and careful study, which in any case can only bring us ever closer to also the important influences of the period, is indeed worthy.
With regards to the Aeons and Gnosticism in general, I once looked through especially the important Apocryphon of John, which possibly dates from around the same time as the early appearance of the Sefer Yetzirah, ie, the 2nd century, and simply and personally could not find how the Atouts arise or reflect the particular Gnosticism there depicted. This does not of course mean it does not, and rather only points to my own slow and progressive move away from Gnostic influence (rather than gnostic influence) in the places and times of Tarot emergence.
The correspondence between such Gnosticism, early Merkabah or Kabalah, and the ways in which some of the later spiritual Alchemical and the syncretic impulses of the Occidental traditions merge speaks volumes of overlapping influences and reflection.
A useful place to also have a look at gnostic materials is a site began and co-organised by an old university friend of mine (M. Alan Kazlev): http://www.kheper.net/.
This does not take away from seeing the sequence and whole of the Tarot as indeed displaying an integrative sequence or whole. Personally, I do see it as such as well - but as to the influence of what appears to be that wonderful and important Romance of the Rose, it seems more to have played into the French national ethos than the specific illuminations of the Tarot.
Sophie-David
I particularly like this link also, I had run across it when exploring the alchemical meanings of the rose. In meditation on the Lovers, I have seen the red rose as symbolic of the High Priestess and astrological Moon, and the white rose as representing the Empress and astrological Venus. And that quote from the Gospel of Thomas, "When you make the two one, and when you make the inner as the outer and the outer as the inner and the above as the below, and when you make the male and female a single one, then shall you enter the kingdom", always gives me the shivers. It seems to me to be my theme statement for the year.wildchilde said:
What immediately came to mind is how are the primary four Aeons represented in the Tarot? My natural response is Son-Masculine in Magician (often imaged as Jesus), Son-Feminine in High Priestess, Sophia-Feminine in Empress, Sophia-Masculine in Emperor.wildchilde said:
Yes, the Divine Feminine has been progressively co-opted, split and distorted. Dr. Bernard Butler has a particularly colourful and concise characterization of Inanna, an integrated visualization of the the dynamic feminine archetype here: http://www.zyworld.com/DrBernardSButler/Inanna.htm.wildchilde said:
In chapter seven of his thesis on Inanna, http://www.peninsula.starway.net.au/~bernard/cover.html, Butler also describes how the Goddess was distorted and supressed. It is interesting to note that the Sumerians also perceived the Goddess Inanna as having androgynous aspects.
wildchilde
Hi jmd and Sophie-David! Thank you both so much for your input on this thread...sorry to take so long to post again...have a lot going on
Sophie-David, thanks for your wonderful links! I am still working on getting through them; hopefully will have more food for thought after such time. For me personally, I have yet to find a way to 'separate out' specific cards as representative of either Divine Influence. They each seem to have qualities that apply to any given card.
At the risk of mixing threads and historical ideas again!, Ross G. Caldwell recently began an amazing thread that (at least to me) appears to apply also to our discussion on gnosticism (note lower case 'g'). http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=30834
This thread discusses in great detail (also with jmd's input!) the symbology of the cards and the gnostic influences found, especially through Pythagorean, Egyptian, and other Philosophies of the times. One thing that keeps popping up for me as I try to absorb the ideas of Gnosticism and gnosis is the etymology of the word "Philosopher" which originally from the Latin (I believe) meant "Lover of Sophia" (or in other words, follower of the Divine Feminine). I think this is a very interesting point when speaking of the different philosophies which sprang out of Egyptian beliefs, Gnosticism, Kabbalism, etc.
jmd, I really appreciated what you stated here about the difference b/w Gnosticism and gnosis! Maybe I am too "broad minded" for a discussion on historical influences on the Tarot, but I do feel that gnostic influence on the Tarot can be found in many areas. Because gnosticism is such a broad area (experientially and geographically) I somehow cannot seperate the Archetypes from the gnostic influence...as you point out, this doesn't mean that Gnosticism itself directly influenced or played a part in the creation of the Tarot.
I totally agree with this point. Although I certainly have a very limited understanding of the history of Tarot in France. As to this particular work, I have to agree that it does not appear to be any type of illumination on the Tarot istelf. I perhaps should not have tried to 'force' it into that category with my previous musings. I was only trying to show how perceptions play a part in an individuals understanding of any particular work.
Sophie-David, thanks for your wonderful links! I am still working on getting through them; hopefully will have more food for thought after such time. For me personally, I have yet to find a way to 'separate out' specific cards as representative of either Divine Influence. They each seem to have qualities that apply to any given card.
At the risk of mixing threads and historical ideas again!, Ross G. Caldwell recently began an amazing thread that (at least to me) appears to apply also to our discussion on gnosticism (note lower case 'g'). http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=30834
This thread discusses in great detail (also with jmd's input!) the symbology of the cards and the gnostic influences found, especially through Pythagorean, Egyptian, and other Philosophies of the times. One thing that keeps popping up for me as I try to absorb the ideas of Gnosticism and gnosis is the etymology of the word "Philosopher" which originally from the Latin (I believe) meant "Lover of Sophia" (or in other words, follower of the Divine Feminine). I think this is a very interesting point when speaking of the different philosophies which sprang out of Egyptian beliefs, Gnosticism, Kabbalism, etc.
Sophie-David
Hello Wildchildewildchilde said:
Good to hear from you again! Could you explain the difference between Gnosticism and gnosis?
Yes, thank you for the reminder about the word origins of "philosophy" and "philosopher", they had dropped out of consciousness...wildchilde said:
