Jump to content

Talk:Hermeticism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 207.237.89.3 (talk) at 15:31, 22 January 2013 (→‎Dates = AD vs CE). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Greek Origins

The presumed Egyptian origin of the Hermetica of Bruno and Ficini has been roundly refuted and disproven yet mention of it still abounds, possibly due to the predeliction of such in occult groups. If Hermes Trismagistos was a syncretistic deity comprising Hermes and Thoth his name would be 'Hermes-Thoth' just as Zeus-Ammon was a syncretism of Zeus and Amon. At best Hermes assimilated Thoth but certainly not he reverse. In any case Thoth appears as the son of Hermes and Trismagistos doesn't even feature as anything like a deity in the actual text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.248.192 (talk) 13:00, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted as Factually incorrect;

Hellenistic Egyptian who is the representation of the conflation of the Egyptian god Thoth with the Greek Hermes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.137.36.230 (talk) 12:18, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Manly P. Hall

As in Hermetism, I propose that all information that comes from Manly P. Hall's works be removed unless it is verified by a reputable third party. -999 (Talk) 16:38, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that Hall is not a generally reliable source. However I think that instead of removing things that cite him it may be more useful to state that he is not a consistent source. The reason for this is that his works are well known and are often a good starting point for finding information as he does say where a lot of his stuff comes from.Morgan Leigh 10:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with referencing Hall is that it creates, in essence, a reference to a reference. Secret Teachings of All Ages is encyclopedic in nature. It would be more appropriate to reference, if possible, the original sources that Hall himself references. But, I wouldn't go so far as to qualify Hall as a non-reputable third-party without such a person making the qualification knowing a little more about Hall's background.--P Todd 01:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey 2006

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

WikiProject Ancient Egypt (or KV) keeps trying to add this post-Egyptian subject to their project. Please respond as to whether you support or oppose this. Please make a decision below, and discuss in the discussion section.

Support

  • Support - Hermes Trismegistos is a syncretic figure conflated from The Egyptian god Thoth and the Greek god Hermes, amongst other things. It is impossible to have an understanding of HTM if one does not know of this Egyptian source. The concepts of Hermeticism are likewise impossible to understand if one is not aware of the Egyptian traditions that lie behind them. I think one needs to bear in mind the huge socio-political changes that arose as a result of Alexander the Great's conquests, especially in the way that it affected both Greek and Egyptian religion. Hermeticism is NOT post Egyptian. By which I mean, it is a coming together of two religions which had many similarities and as such allowed the syncretism of these two gods to happen. If the concepts were not as similar as they are then this syncretism would have been much harder to imagine. My point here is really that it is very hard to pick an arbitary line as to what is 'post ancient Egyptian'. This is like trying to understand North American history without considering English history. Morgan Leigh 02:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Tricky

This is a tricky one as many Hermeticists and Occultists believe that although the texts of the Hermetica are definitely post Ancient Egypt the wisdom is not. The theory goes that the substance of the Hermetica dates back to ancient Pharaonic Egyptian religious ideas. Some commentators claim that similar concepts and images can be found in Ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs. I for one have no idea. We know the Hermetica was written in Greek but we also know that there was a lot of intellectual/spiritual traffic between Ancient Greece and Egypt. Pythagoras was supposed to have spent 22 years in Egypt learning his theories. I leave it to the experts - if there are such - to decide. :-) ThePeg 17:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Removal of Hall citations

WP:V states:

"Verifiability" in this context does not mean that editors are expected to verify whether, for example, the contents of a New York Times article are true. In fact, editors are strongly discouraged from conducting this kind of research, because original research may not be published in Wikipedia. Articles should contain only material that has been published by reliable sources, regardless of whether individual editors view that material as true or false. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is thus verifiability, not truth.

It is not for you to decide whether or not he is correct. He is a prominent figure, prominent enough that you have a view on him, which WP:NPOV states:

The neutral point of view is a means of dealing with conflicting views. The policy requires that, where there are or have been conflicting views, these should be presented fairly, but not asserted. All significant published points of view are presented, not just the most popular one.

You need to find something to balance it out if you find him in any way wrong. You cannot simply go through indiscriminately deleting views because you do not like Manly P. Hall.

KV(Talk) 22:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I support the removal of unqualified Hall citations. He was not an academic, and his theories are at best imaginative. Find supporting citations, start a section on Hall's beliefs, or qualify his assertions. And do it in such a way that you don't undo all the formatting improvements H.D. did. -999 (Talk) 22:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Book of the Dead

I'm not sure why this paragraph is in here. I thought that the Corpus Hermeticum was being discussed, not the Book of the Dead. Does Budge mention the Corpus Hermeticum at all? If not, this simply appears to be a speculative attempt to make the C.H. seem older than it is...based on speculation about a completely different book. No thanks, that's not encyclopedic. —Hanuman Das 10:18, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

However, E. A. Wallis Budge, uses different reasoning. Budge, in discussing the Egyptian text, The Book of the Dead, clearly stated that the earliest version of The Book of the Dead found was not necessarily the earliest version that existed. Budge argued that one cannot claim that an earlier version does not exist simply because it has not been found.[1] Budge maintains that The Book of the Dead itself was drastically rewritten, reorganized, and amended several times in Egypt, creating four distinct versions which have been found. These versions stretch over a millennium, from the Fifth Dynasty (2498 BCE - 2345 BCE) to the Twentieth Dynasty (1186 BCE - 1073 BCE).[2]

Hermeticism vs the Church

The Church has not always been opposed to Hermeticism has it? The article says it has. The Wikipedia has an image of Hermes on a mosaic floor in Sienna Cathedral which suggests integration rather than opposition. The Renaissance was hugely influenced by Hermetic reading. People like Pico, Ficino and many artists and religious figures of their day saw Hermes' words as confirming the message of Christianity. Most Renaissance religious art was inspired by Hermetic ideas as much as Scripture. Milton read and admired and lifted imagery from Hermes. It would be useful to know when the Church cracked down on the Hermetica. Could someone elaborate on this? I suppose one of the fascinating things about the Hermetica is that although it echoes or presages vast amounts of Christian and Judaic ideas and imagery it was never turned into a religion and thus has no dogma attached to it. This means it can be read without prejudice. I'm reading it now and find it extraordinary. One element no-one has talked about is how close to Quantum Theory it is. It is perhaps no surprise that the Coat Of Arms of nuclear scientist Ernest Rutherford has Hermes on it! ThePeg 17:14, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At one time most scholars thought that the Hermetica was written by early members of the Christian cult. There are a lot of similarities between ideas expressed in the Hermetica, and ideas expressed by Gnostic Christians. I don't think it was until Coptic versions of the Hermetic texts started to appear, suggesting that they might have pre-dated Christianity, that this idea was even seriously challenged. I'm no scholar, but my studies of the subject lead me to think that early Christianity was a polyglot of different ideas and belief systems-- and there is no reason to think that Hermeticism was singled out until about the same time that the Gnostics were suppressed by Rome. Light lvx 18:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)light_lvx[reply]

Magical idealism - need stub

Can anybody start a stub article on Magical idealism? Thanks. -- 201.51.221.66 15:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article is ghastly, I will try my best

I am a devout hermeticist and if I where to inform my friend that I was a hermeticist and they tried to learn more about it by going to this article. I don't think they would even get the slightest idea of what hermeticism is. The main problem I see in this article is that it tries to include and treat material originated in the last few hundreds of years as the same as tracible ancient documents. Lets face it, The corpus hermeticum can be traced thousands of years ago. The Kybalion can not. Trying to suggest that the early hermetic authors believed in the theories in the Kybalion before the Kybalion was published you would have to accept that the early hermetic authors somehow got ahold of this document without public knowledge. The kybalion was published in 1912. Which means that unless this is a mass conspiracy. All hermetic authors before 1912 has no knowledge of the kybalion. Using the Kybalion as a source for the majority of this article without specifying which theories come from which document is needless and confusing. Thusly, I will try to rewrite this article, I will outline which document expresses which theories by quoting the document and expounding it by sourcing the interpretations and I will try to keep as much of the objective information already provided in this article as much intact as possible. This will be quite a project for me, so it will take some time and please express any problems you may have with this and I will try to be as complient as possible. JaynusofSinope 13:19, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

does anyone know what this means?

"These beliefs have influenced magic traditions and further, the impact of serving as a set of religious beliefs."

This doesn't make sense. What is "These beliefs have influenced... the impact of serving as a set of beliefs" supposed to mean? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aussietiger (talk • contribs) 05:37, 21 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

haha. that bot is fast. realised i forgot to sign, tried to edit to sign, couldn't 'cause the bot was editing it already. aussietiger 05:38, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can explain the first part - Hermeticism was a massive influence on the Renaissance and the idea of the Magus as something to aspire to. Champions of Hermeticism included Pico, Ficino, Bruno and a host of others all of whom influenced the development of European culture through their spreading of Hermetic ideas (Leonardo, Michelangelo, Marlowe, Dee, Shakespeare etc all read their work). Some of the non-philosophical elements of the Hermetica include Astrology, the conjuring of spirits into statues and the hierarchy of the universe. Along with Kaballah, the Hermetica set a lot of people off on the search for how one could use the forces of the universe magically - in this sense I mean the word literally ie not tricks but the manipulation of reality, the conjuring of angels and demons (Dee did a lot of this, or believed he did), healing illnesses, achieving immortality etc. Practitioners such as Crowley and the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn all persued this course.

The second half of the sentence doesn't make any sense. Looks like a bit of grammatical error to me. ThePeg 11:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you could edit it so it makes sense. aussietiger 13:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which bit? The first bit? I think it makes sense. I can't edit the second bit as I don't know what it should mean. ThePeg 21:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's meant to say: These beliefs have influenced magic traditions and further, [have had] the impact of serving as a set of religious beliefs.
What that means is that as well as influencing magical theory, they have had a secondary influence upon the religious beliefs of Hermetic scholars and their readers.
Nuttyskin (talk) 16:04, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fundamental problem

The intro of an article is supposed to function as an abstract, but this introduction only vaguely talks about beliefs and philosophy, and doesn't go into detail about what they are. Hermeticism seems to be distillable into key concepts, and yet the article does not do this at all. If it does, it's so buried in unclear writing that it is indistinguishable. Could someone who knows something about this rewrite the intro so it works? MSJapan 05:32, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sabians

The comment about the Sabians/Sabeans is not quite true. What happened was there was a community of people the Muslims encountered who practised Hermeticism as their religion. When they were told that because they were not mentioned in the Koran as one of the acceptable religions (Judiasm, Christianity, Islam) they were given a period of time to decide what to do - convert or die. They paid an Islamic Scholar a great deal of money for advice. He scoured the Koran and found a reference to a people known as the Sabeans who were also deemed acceptable and advised them to name themselves that. This they did, so when the authorities returned they let them live. The source for this story I found in the book Hermetica: the Lost Wisdom of the Pharoahs. ThePeg 21:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Granted that is the story, but it's missing the part that the source quoted is mentioning. They were allowed to live because they were accepted to be the Sabians. Feel free to add more information, perhaps in the history section, elaborating from that source. Btw, they also had to name their book and prophet. Technically, though, they called themselves Hermetists, the precursor to Hermeticism, but of course that article was deleted, not because it wasn't sourced, or was untrue (generally, if a dictionary includes either, it's Hermetism, not Hermeticism), but because they disagreed with it and claimed that a term from the early centuries BC or AD was created by a man born in the 20th century. I gave up on editting this article after they simply went through and deleted everything they didn't want to be true, POVed the article, and got away with it since they had numbers, even if not actual policy.KV(Talk) 22:08, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Picture citation?

The "medieval rendering" at the top of the page is by Jean-Jacques Boissard, from De Divinatione et Magicis Praestigiis (1605). I wasn't sure how much (if any) of that should go into the caption, but probably at least a link to the artist is appropriate? Strumphs 15:45, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal. 2007

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I have suggested that the As Above, So Below article be merged into this one. There is very little in that article that is not already covered here (other than some examples of rock music lyrics that make use of the term), so there is not much to merge. I simply see no reason for such a short article on a concept that is inseperable from Hermeticism, and which is already covered fairly well here. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 19:14, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agree: As the original creator of this article one year ago, I agree with this proposal. I would however like to assure we put a redirect in place that routes to the As Above So Below sub-heading in this article. When I created the entry, I had hoped that it would be expanded. With the exception of the interesting but trivial rock music lyric references, I see that no additional expansion has been made. I would also like to see the "see also" section somehow preserved--I find the other references that are not neccessarily thought to be Hermetic in nature to the concept significant.--P Todd 01:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am glad that someone finally responded to this proposal. Honestly, though, I cannot claim to know enough on the subject to decide what should be merged, and what should not. Certainly, the, as you say "interesting but trivial," rock lyrics are not necessary. But, truly, I leave it to you, as the original author to judge what should be merged and how it should be done. I am not sure, honestly, that redirects to specific subsections of an article are allowed. But, I can check on that. Thanks for the response. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 02:17, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any further comment on this matter? It has been more than a month now since I suggested the merger. If there is no further comment, I will go ahead. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 23:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RepublicanJacobite, I'll make the merge sometime this Thanksgiving weekend.--P Todd (talk) 16:10, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. Thanks. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 16:25, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge completed.--P Todd (talk) 03:20, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 03:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Dates = AD vs CE

We recently had a brief edit flurry, with one editor replacing all dates with "AD/BC" dating... and another editor reverting back to the "CE/BCE" designation. I don't think the dating system has actually been discussed ... so it may be a good idea to get a record of consensus on file in case this becomes an issue. I approve of using CE. Since the article establishes that Hermeticism has non-Christian elements to it, and can even be thought of as a non-Christian religion, I think it is appropriate to use a non-Christian dating system. I am sure there are other reasons. Please express them for the record. Blueboar 14:31, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a non-christian Hermetist and the person who started the CE dating, I concur. KV(Talk) 15:13, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I concur as well, even though I am Irish Catholic. The BCE/CE system is much more appropriate. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 02:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. (off topic: why do I suddenly feel like I'm in the set up for a bad religious joke here: "A Protestant, a Pagan and a Papist all post on a Wikipedia Talk Page, the Protestant says....") Blueboar 03:01, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I hate to see a joke left incomplete; it's like whetting your lips and then getting nothing to drink. Accordingly, I'll take the liberty of referencing the joke (and, with artistic license, offering a variant on the beginning you cited):

An Episcopalian died and went to Heaven. As St. Peter was escorting him around his new surroundings, he came across a group of people who were suffering terrible tortures. He queried Peter, "Who are those people, and why are they being punished so terribly?" St Peter replied, "Oh, those are Jews who ate pork."

They continued with their journey, wherupon the man spied another group of people, suffering even greater trials, and he again asked St Peter, "Who are these people, and why are they being punished so terribly?" And St. Peter replied, "Oh, those are Catholics, and they ate meat on Fridays."

They continued on their way, and they came across a third group of people, who were suffering even greater tortures. The man was extremely curious, and he asked St. Peter, "Well, who are these unfortunate souls, and what did they do to warrant these horrible sufferings?' "Oh," St. Peter replied, "Those are Episcopalians, and they were caught eating their steak with a salad knife."


I hope this provided you with a welcome break from your esoteric researches into the Hermetic Corpus. 207.237.89.3 (talk) 15:31, 22 January 2013 (UTC) Allen Roth[reply]

Alchemy

For Hermeticism, Alchemy is not the changing of physical lead into physical gold.[15] Rather, one attempts to turn themselves from a base person (symbolized by lead) into an adept master (symbolized by gold). The various stages of chemical distillation and fermentation, among them, are metaphors for the Magnum Opus (Latin for Great Work) performed on the soul.[16]

I am so thoroughly tired of this modern, psychological, new-age reductionist misinterpretation of alchemy. It is just as false as the misinterpretation of alchemy by the hands of modern, scientific materialism and dogma. If anyone looks into the actual history of the ancient alchemists, they will prove to themselves the utter ignorance and falsity of this statement. Horror of horrors, many great alchemists, and not just greedy puffers worked in their labs. The laboratory work is not just merely a metaphor for the internal work. The inner and the outer work are in harmony. It is an investigation of God and Spirit in Nature, not just human nature, as the anthropocentric new agers might proselytize! I will make a commitment to myself to reword this as best as I can, in alignment with actual fact, and not new age, psychological garbage! If anyone contends my position, I would be very interested in their well-informed judgments. Thank you--75.155.209.69 (talk) 00:47, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, now my references are not perfect, but as I am a beginning practical alchemist and not a scholar or historian, please bear with me. I will work harder for better references, and others can as well, but I feel this explanation is MUCH less false and reductionist and is much more encompassing; much closer to the truth. --75.155.209.69 (talk) 04:42, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(goran) It did not save what I wrote. I do not know why. Tis a lesson to write it in notepad first. I'll have to redo it.--75.155.209.69 (talk) 04:47, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I intended to leave a response here after I reverted your edits yesterday, but I forgot. All I wanted to suggest was that you combine your information (and your references) with the information (and references) that were already there. That way, both positions are represented. I do not have a problem with your edits, per se, I just did not want to see the previous content deleted. Morgan Leigh has made some edits today that are close to what I am talking about. Let me know if I can be of any assistance. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 01:22, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you, that is much, much better.--207.81.94.148 (talk) 19:29, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merger 2008

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The article Hermetism, Hermeticism and other thought systems has been proposed for merger into this article. There is currently a section of the article already dealing with the subject, and the most relevant information can be merged into it. I would personally support such a merger, as having an entirely separate article dealing with the alleged impact of one belief system, which is in several ways difficult to differentiate with Gnosticism, seems to me to be giving undue weight to those particular sources who do make such differentiation. While the interrelationships of religions is important, and there is already an Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion/Interfaith work group to deal with such matters, lumping all this material together into an article which deals primarily with the idea from the viewpoint of what is probably the least significant of the faith traditions mentioned seems counterproductive and possibly POV pushing. I would support such a merger. John Carter (talk) 20:55, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Oppose - The merger would be complete POV pushing. The article exists because it can be sourced and it includes both arguments for interrelation, opposing ideas on interrelation, and detracting statements about the interrelation, all meticulously cited. There is clear differentiation between Hermetism and Hermeticism (which was in the process of being expanded and explained) and both of them and Gnosticism. These differences have been put forth and cited by reliable peer-reviewed sources from University presses. There is an attempt to improve Wikipedia's coverage of this topic in general, and it seems that everyone just came over from WP:FRINGE/Noticeboard to try to remove any attempt of expansion in some sort of thought that Hermetic thought is a fringe theory that should only be minimally covered. That is not the purpose of WP:FRINGE at all. I support the creation of similar articles on all of those subjects, but I am not responsible for creating them myself. This is deletionism at it's worst; attempting to minimize coverage on a subject no matter how well cited and how well its notability is proven. Such a merger would be of a detriment to Wikipedia.
However, let it be said that giving a brief synopsis here on the topics dealing specifically with Hermeticism, and in Hermetism, specifically with Hermetism, would be a good thing if the main article remains standing. That would improve Wikipedia, though improvement takes time, and I happen to be one of very few trying to add to this subject and the only one to add extensively. Please try to help me by expanding the coverage and countering any POV issues you might perceive with equally well referenced balancing material than deleting well cited text. KV(Talk) 02:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Hermetism, Hermeticism and other thought systems" is not an arguable title. Perhaps something sensible could be produced under "History of Hermeticism" or similar, organized as a {{main}} article branching off this one. KV first needs to understand basic Wikipedia rules such as WP:SYN. If you want to discuss the cult of Hermes in classical antiquity (i.e. before Hellenism), you'll need another title. Try Hermes or Ancient Greek religion to begin with. "Hermetism" is used synonymously with "Hermeticism" and refers to the tradition of Late Antiquity (Hermetica) revived in the Renaissance. Discussion of an older cult is welcome, but will need excellent sources. Esotericist blather about Ancient Egypt isn't going to cut it. dab (𒁳) 06:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Peer-reviewed academic sources, which as per WP:RS are the sources which should be most strongly considered, discount Hermetism being any older than the 2nd century CE. These include The Oxford Dictionary of World Religions edited by John Bowker. If you can provide other academic peer-reviewed sources which substantially refute this, please do so. However, as stated above, they will have to be very reliable and relied-upon to prove that they do not qualify as fringe theories. The fact that the articles which have been recently worked on do their best to minimize, even to the point of not mentioning, the prevailing scientific consensus on the subject is evidence that, at present, the article already is pushing POV and fringe theories. Otherwise, it is at best very difficult to differentiate between Hermitism and the Gnostic tradition from which, to the best of my knowledge, the overwhelming majority of reliable sources believe Hermeticism arose from. John Carter (talk) 14:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just moved the comparative article to Hermetism and other religions (that seems to be standard). The article is still awful but at least the title isn't quite so painfully bad. I've also deleted some of the more outstanding claims - that the entire Pentateuch is a Hermetic text, and that Marx's theories were Hermeticism-inspired. I mean, WTF? Moreschi2 (talk) 14:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Original Research in Rosicrucian Section

I placed a flag on the "Rosicrucianism" section because these comments not only are unsourced but seem virtually impossible to source as they are. Why is the graded system of Rosicrucianism more like the graded system of Freemasonry than the graded system of the American public school system? Besides, Rosicrucianism is older than Masonry by at least a century. Etc etc. Section needs attention. Yonderboy (talk) 22:29, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the graded system of Rosicrucianism more like the graded system of Freemasonry than the graded system of the American public school system?
An absurd question! It is like Freemasonry because, as with all recondite knowledge, it is of interest to Freemasons, who tend to organise things in the manner to which they are themselves accustomed. If it were organised by members of the American public school system, doubtless the hierarchical resemblance between them would be greater.
Rosicrucianism is older than Masonry by at least a century
Only the Grand Lodge variety. Freemasonry in Scotland dates to the 15th Century at least.
Nuttyskin (talk) 17:57, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a citation for The Rosicrucian Enlightenment (Frances Yates), which documents the publication of the three German pamphlets in the 17th century. This reference does not cover any of the other material in the section in question, however. AdamFunk (talk) 19:29, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Modern History of Hermetics

This is not a direct edit, but something that needs to be discussed by everyone who has been editing this article!

Hermetics is not a static system of beliefs or texts, but is a source of knowledge for students to continue the work of developing the knowledge of Hermetic Science and Philosophy.

The first thing missing from this article is a definition of Hermetics. I define it as follows: "Hermetic Science is the study of human consciousness and how the individual uses their consciousness to understand and to function in their environment." This definition and others should be a topic of serious discussion.

If you have read and studied the texts over the period of time already given in the various parts of this entry you will see that this Science and Philosophy has continued to develop from the time of the first documents to the present day.

Start as far back in the history of the documents as you care to go. For example: "Iamblichus' Exhortation to the Study of Philosophy" is a far better explanation of the basic concepts of Hermetics than any work that precedes it. This improvement in the knowledge and the basic principles and concepts of Hermetics shows a clear line of development all the way from Classical Greece to the present day. A still more recent example is the work of Mary Anne Atwood “A Suggestive Inquiry into the Hermetic Mystery;” originally published anomymously in 1850. It was later reprinted by Isobel de Steiger. However, it is known that the reprint is accurate because an additional copies of the original work are available. I am unsure if any of the editors of this article are even aware of this text or have ever read it. I note that it has not been mentioned anywhere in this article nor do any of the numerous works cited in her work appear in this article. (I have a copy of this book that I scanned and formmated into an e-text and would be happy to pass that to anyone who would like to read it. E-mail to Hermotimus@aol.com.)

It is known that this book found its way into the hands of a number of students of Hermetics who continued to carry on with the work of developing and improving the understanding of Hermetic Science and Philosophy. Among those students are the authors: Waite Arthur Edward (note his Hermetic Museum work); as well as numerous members of the Golden Dawn through the influence of both Waite and de Steiger; Atkinson, William, Walker, who is the likely author or co-author of the Kybalion, which is considered one of the modren texts which defines Hermetics; and Case, Paul Foster, who founded the Builders of the Adytum in 1932, and through its offices over the past 76 years, have taught by means of mail order lessons, what he knew of Hermetics and what he developed in terms of new knowledge on the subject during his lifetime. Hermotimus (talk) 03:47, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good try, but you shouldn't use the first person in an encyclopedia article. Also, all opinions on a topic must be cited to a reference. Please read WP:CITE to find out how to properly format the citation. Bob (QaBob) 04:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To put in all the citations needed for this discussion would bring this discussion up to at least 15,000 words. and if the discussion would be later placed in the article it would overshadow everything else in the article. I am willing to take on explaining the process of the development of Hermetics step by step from its first known documents to the modern day, citing each document and citing the changes from one document to its predeccor, but to do so would require a full length book and I am sure that this does not belong in wikipedia.

As far as the definition of Hermetics, I will dig out the needed citations. I know of at least 12 books that contain solid references to that definition and will post it here for further discussion, But, this will take me a couple of weeks to sort through all of the material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hermotimus (talk • contribs) 13:48, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. Just be aware of Wikpedia policy against synthesis and I'm sure you will do fine. Oh, and if you would add ~~~~ at then end of each comment you post it will add your signature and date/time of posting. Bob (QaBob) 16:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to break this into two separate topics. Here to continue the modern history of Hermetics and a new topic on the Definition of HermeticsHermotimus (talk) 22:54, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of Hermetics

"Simply stated, Hermetism, or its synonym Alchemy, was in its primary intention and office the philosophic and exact science of the regeneration of the human soul from its present sense-immersed state into the perfection and nobility of that divine condition in which it was originally created. Secondarily and incidentally, as will presently appear, it carried with it a knowledge of the way in which the life-essence of things belonging to the subhuman kingdoms - the metallic genera in particular and, correspondingly, be intensified and raised to a nobler form than that in which it exists in its present natural state. It is to this secondary aspect only that the popular mind turns when Alchemy is mentioned, unaware of the subject's larger and primary intention, and it is desirable, therefore, to treat of the science here first from the larger aspect, and subsequently from its lesser and subsidiary one." A SUGGESTIVE INQUIRY INTO HERMETIC PHILOSOPHY AND ALCHEMY by Mary Anne Atwood (1850)(reissue with intro by de Steiger) LONDON: J. M. WATKINS, 21 Cecil Court, W.C. pg 26 Hermotimus (talk) 23:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are in the wrong place, there is another article on Hermetism, which is the topic of your quote. This article is on Hermeticism. Bob (QaBob) 23:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Statement removed then reverted

I removed this statement: "This last is an example of how Hermes Trismegistus was adopted by Christianity to serve its own particular purposes." The example, which I left in, was sourced and it stated: "Another explanation, in the Suda (10th century), is that "He was called Trismegistos on account of his praise of the trinity, saying there is one divine nature in the trinity.""

  1. The claim that all of Christianity adopted Hermes Trismegistus is absurdly broad.
  2. The statement is unsourced, and broad conclusions are exactly the type of statements that should be sourced.
  3. Not only does it claim all of Christianity adopted Hermes, but makes a second claim that it adopted Hermes "to serve its own particular purposes." Which are or were what exactly?
  4. The example the statement cites is based upon is a quote from the Suda, which is a 10th century Byzantine Encyclopedia written by someone we know nothing about (it is said to be Suidas). So to claim that he, or whoever wrote it, is an example of how all of Christianity adopted Hermes is a bit of stretch.
  5. Who called him Trismegistos? All of Christianity? The author of the Suda?

So the statement should be removed or properly sourced by reliable scholarship. Sweetmoose6 (talk) 21:20, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Sweetmoose5, and thanks for your edits. I was the person who reverted this particular edit and I'd like to address your points.
1. I felt that as this sentence followed a sentence referring to Marcilio Ficino that the context of renaissance Christianity would be clear. However I will edit it to make this clearer.
2. I have added sources in my edit of today.
3. The purpose of Christianity adopting HTM, was that of demonstrating a 'prisca theologia'. Until Casaubon's dating of the Hermetica to around the first or second centuries CE, it was widely believed that HTM was an ancient Egyptian priest, contemporary with Moses. and this was the line of argument put forward by theologians of the Renaissance. However, it was not only renaissance Christians such as Giordano Bruna, Pico Della Mirandola and Marscilio Ficino, who advanced this argument. Much earlier writers such as Lactantius and Augustine also regarded HTM as having divine wisdom. Lacantius' purpose, in his 'Divine Institutes', is to convince pagans to convert to Christianity. He sees HTM as a prophet of Christianity. Augustine, writing after Julian the apostate, isn't as effusive as Lactantius, warning that the Asclepius' references to the egyptian decans is tantamount to daemon worship, however he does still cite HTM as a pagan prophet whose prophecies prove the claims of Christianity, even though he has obtained this knowledge through the decans.
4. While the author of the Suda is unknown, it is still an authoratitive source. It is however far from the only Christian source that mentions HTM. I can be no more succinct thatn Frances Yates, in her "Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition" (Routleledge, London, 1964), so I shall simply quote her. "The name HTM was well known in the middle ages and and was connected with alchemy, and magic, particularilly with magic images or talismans" (p51). "However mediaeval writers interested in natural philosophy speak of him with respect; for Roger Bacon he was the 'Father of Philosophers'" (p51). There are other Christian sources mentioned by her in this work.
5. I would also refer you to the abovementioned work for more Christian references to HTM and the derivation of his naming as 'Thrice Great', especially the common Christian explanation of there having been three Hermes' i.e. Enoch, Noah and the Egyptian priest king who is known to us as HTM and derives his triple moniker from being the third in this geanology.
Morgan Leigh | Talk 02:38, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to be so late in responding. I think the discussion is interesting but I would caution the outright label of Giordano Bruno, Marsilio Ficino, Campanella and Giovanni Pico della Mirandola as "Christian" writers. I'm not sure their positions on some things (particularly in the area of humanism or neoplatonism) would exactly be endorsed by orthodox Christians. One problem, obviously, is that one may call himself/herself a Christian and not actually be one, so it is difficult to really say who is and who is not a Christian. So all I'm really asking is what makes them "Christian" writers? And when you say Augustine, do you mean Augustine of Hippo or Augustine of Canterbury? Regardless I won't argue with you about either of the Augustines being Christian writers, but what exactly did he say? Sweetmoose6 (talk) 22:01, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure their positions on some things [..] would exactly be endorsed by orthodox Christians
"Orthodox Christians" (who seem to be a breed apart from the rest of us, ordinary people who merely happen to be Christians) never seem able to agree on anything, so they are hardly the best people to decide. And anyway, what Christianity is defined as meaning today would not have passed muster in either the Catholic or Protestant confessions of Giordano Bruno's time. It is not, I think, extreme or unreasonable to say that as these people came from a Christian background, in a Christian culture, and self-defined as Christians, that they ought to be classed as Christians. Ergo, it is a duck.
Nuttyskin (talk) 18:09, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is hermeticism a proper noun?

I realize that wiki rules dictate that all entries are capitalized, but the author Jan Vijg in his/her book "Aging of the Genome" uses the term un-capitalized. re: Can modern science succeed where hermeticism failed?

The wiktionary has no entry and so, I wonder if capitalization is a mistake or that some kind of notation should be applied in the definition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.174.73.124 (talk) 02:01, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The three parts of the wisdom of the whole universe

Didn't know where else to put this, so here goes. Isn't it said somewhere that the reason HT possesses three parts of the wisdom is because he is actually a pseudonym of three composite authors, or traditions, namely those of Europe, Asia and Egypt? Can't cite a source, does anyone else know of this?

This is speculative but perhaps a better interpretation of three parts of the wisdom could represent the development of Hermetism from it's Hellenic roots. The three parts being the civic religion, the mystery religions and philosophy. Hermetism subsumes and completes all three. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.137.36.230 (talk) 10:08, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nuttyskin (talk) 18:17, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

article is unintelligible to those outside your domain

I'm generally well-read and considered fairly intelligent, as well, one of my interests is Philosophy. So it was with some eagerness that I clicked the Hermeticism link in another article (Paracelsus) looking to learn a little something more. Well, from the intro paragraph on, I simply can not decipher anything that this article is trying saying. In that regard, all your work here is useless. What's the point of writing in a way that only those who already understand can get anything from it? Clearly you put a lot of effort into this article. Pls take that passion and re-write at least the intro paragraph so that a reasonably informed lay person can understand something about Hermeticism.

Ronewolf (talk) 20:06, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Message Bible

The following insert is being placed into the article. There is no references and the said user has inserted statements trying to connect an "Occult" link to the Christian Message Bible. I will oppose until a real source is found. Good luck in finding it.

In the Message Bible translation, created by Eugene Peterson, the well known sentence in the Lord's prayer translated from New Testament Greek manuscripts usually as, "Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven", is rendered "Do what's best — as above, so below."

Basileias (talk) 02:41, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Basileias, I have not stated that there is a link between The Message Bible and the occult. I have simply inserted a piece of factual relevant information into the Wikipedia entry on the expression "As above; so below". Had I asserted that the Message Bible was occultic I would have needed a reference. However, the only reference required for my entry is one linking the expression "As above so below" to The Message Bible for Matt 6:10. In the original Greek of Matt 6:10 the words for "heaven" and "earth" and God's "will" occur. Eugene Petersen did not translate any of these words but made the fascinating choice of what is well known as an occult expression and translated "Your will be done on earth as in heaven" as simply "As above, so below". In a best selling Bible translation this fact is not insignificant and I suggest it deserves a mention in Wikipedia. I have no particular preference as to where it appears. You did not like it on the Message Bible page, so I moved it to this article here. This fact about the Message Bible is somewhat embarrassing I know. Either Eugene Petersen, a man of letters, is ignorant about this well known occult expression - which makes it very strange that he would just "invent" it (since the Greek behind it would not throw up this rendering) - or he is aware of it, which makes its insertion even stranger. I am not charging him or his translation with anything. I am stating a curious and fascinating fact in an encyclopedia. I will hold off on editing in anticipation of your response Journalist492 (talk) 20:33, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

the addition seems trivial. Better without it. Car Henkel (talk) 19:36, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Inserting curious facts, whether the intended tie is meant or not, tie a Christian author with the occult. It will need solid references. Basileias (talk) 13:38, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


What is Hermeticism??

This article (or at least its introduction) fails to answer that question. The intro says hermeticism is a set of beliefs, but it doesn't say anything about what those beliefs are. Can someone please fix that?46.194.129.179 (talk) 13:54, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New stuff goes at the bottom. We have a section in the article titled "Hermetic beliefs", but I will give a brief summary of that in the intro. Ian.thomson (talk) 14:41, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ (Budge p. xiii)
  2. ^ (Budge pp. ix-x)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hermeticism&oldid=534340326"