Obiectivarea, caracteristica domeniilor stiintifice, se bazeaza pe adunarea si sistematizarea variatelor realitati ale

domeniului respectiv. Limita acestui proces ester teoria ca premisa suficienta de proiectare, alaturi doar de
datele din teren si de nevoile clientului. "Masina de locuit" a fost poate prea aproape de aceasta limita. De
cealalta parte subiectivismul incearca sa legitimeze inspiratia/creativitatea artistului, chiar pana la pierderea
legaturii cu realitatea. Nu intamplator cele doua margini ale intervalului pomenite sunt cvasi-contemporane in
anii '20 ai secolului 20. O astfel de situatie se datoreaza disparitiei unui fundament comun al gandirii teoretice,
chiar mai mult, negarii acestor vechi "constrangeri" - crestinismul sau/si umanismul. Radicalismul polilor
pomeniti ester demonstrat si de instabilitatea lor. Capela de la Ronchamp a rationalistului numarul 1 - Le
Corbusier - poate fi inteleasa, din aceasta perspectiva, ca o dezertare la inamic. In adevar, libertatea totala
oferite de sistemul de gandire ideologic, sau chiar gnostic in cazul celor pomeniti mai sus, specifica
modernitatii, permite asemenea alunecari cu mare usurinta.
Credinta, gnosticism, ideologie. Inteleg ideologia si gnosticismul in sensul lui Alain Besancon: "Gnoza ester o
corupere a credintei de catre speculatie si a speculatiei de catre credinta. Ideologia ester o corupere a gnozei de
catre stiinta si a stiintei de catre gnoza". Gnoza si ideologia sunt metode de cunoastere ce se dezvolta cu ajutorul
ratiunii formand sisteme coerente. Deaceea se adreseaza cu mult mai mult succes sensibilitatii moderne ce vrea
sa depaseasca etapa credintei. Bazele acestor doua tipuri de cunoastere sunt hermeneutici riscante, ale credintei,
respectiv stiintei, ce nu acopera tocmai exigenta de obiectivare ce le legitimeaza. Odata asumata, credinta, de
orice tip ar fi ea, cosmologizeaza haosul ce o preceda (in situatia limita) sau, mai degraba, reorganizeaza fiinta
ganditoare. Se impune asupra acesteia dictandu-i sau sugerandu-i directii de urmat. Acelasi fenomen care ester
inteles ca o eliberare de catre omul religios, are, din punctul de vedere al libertatii intelese in sens modern, o
latura constrangatoare. Indepartarea de religie ester astfel usor de inteles. Locul eliberat de aceasta nu poate
totusi ramane neocupat. Inlocuitorii au fost gnosticismul (la romantici, expresionisti, sau chiar deconstructivisti)
si, mai ales, ideologia, sub cele mai variate forme. Ironia ester ca aceste doua tipuri de credinte sunt in realitate
mai constrangatoare decat cele religioase, in special datorita profilului majoritar rational al periodei moderne.
Diferenta ester facuta, in primul rand, chiar de participarea activa, prin intermediul ratiunii (intrinseca celor
doua tipuri de sisteme) a credinciosului la completarea cunoasterii. In al doilea rand ideologia si gnoza au
pretentii de cunoastere exhaustiva a cosmosului - se pronunta cu privire la mai multe subiecte decat credinta
religioasa. Lucrarile teoretice a lui Le Corbusier, de exemplu, trateaza un domeniu ce se intinde de la o
antropologie empirica la o axiologie masinista, de la urbanism la scara geografica la design de obiecte uzuale.
Cele doua modele de cosmologizare se regasesc si in universul arhitectural. Fundamentele asumate irational dea lungul perioadei - idolii - au luat forme proprii sau, in mai multe cazuri, imprumutate si au avut naturi
diverse: La inceput a fost puritatea geometriei, divinizata de revolutionarul utopist prin excelenta C. N. Ledoux
si ramasa in prim plan pana in prezent. In prezent pare in general arbitrar a fundamenta edificarea pe atat de
putin - comunicat la un nivel inalt de decibeli, totusi. Incercam sa largim si sa luminam baza prin contributii din
domenii recent stiintifice, ce nu ar fi adus acelasi aport prestigios la inceputul secolului 20: sociologie,
psihologie, antropologie, pentru a enumera doar pe cele mai importante. Sensul in care aceasta schimbare ester
un progres nu trebuie demonstrat teoretic; exista cicatricile abordarii unilaterale pentru a da seama de acesta. Se
poate spune oare ca ne-am inmultit idolii? Din perspectiva istoriei religiilor panteismul poate parea un progres,
dar numai in sensul in care pregateste monoteismul catholic (ma gandesc la exemplul Greciei antice urmate de
Imperiul bizantin).
Delimitare temporala. Datarea nasterii arhitecturii moderne ester problematica. In timp ce unii istorici
detecteaza radacini moderne in cladirile ingineresti din otel si sticla, altii nu admit exponenti apartinatori
secolului 19. Selectia se face in functie de ce consideram a fi relevant pentru geneza fenomenului arhitectural,
in cazurile pomenite: aparitia noilor materiale si inclinatia spre utilitarism si, respectiv, aparitia formelor, mai
tarziu devenite canonice, ale modernismului. Chiar si terminologia ester ambigua, nu numai pentru nespecialisti: arhitectura moderna si modernista nu desemneaza, in general, acelasi fenomen. Din punctul de
vedere al studiului fundamentelor motivationale ale gandirii arhitecturale moderne se constata, contrar
viguroaselor contestari la nivel ideatic si formal, continuitati esentiale intre bazele ideologice ale deciziei in
edificarea secolelor 19 si 20. Liantul principal al perioadei ester componenta revolutionara, ester despartirea de
metoda traditionala a rafinarii formei in pasi marunti succesivi, in respectul continuitatii. Experienta
schimbarilor din ultimii 200 de ani pare sa remarce dificultatea relativ majora a desfasurarii acestui proces pe
taram arhitectural, in comparatie cu cel politic, de exemplu. Inertia cadrului vietuirii urbane se masoara in zeci

sau chiar sute de ani. Contrar ideologiei moderne, relatia acestuia cu componentele sale de varste diferite ester
de includere lenta si definitiva si nu de inlocuiri succesive.
Axiome, credinte. Stabilitatea lumii spirituale se bazeaza pe seturi de informatii asumate fara a fi supuse la
proba procustiana a ratiunii - axiome sau credinte. Acest fapt ester in contradictie evidenta cu pretentia de
obiectivitate a lumii moderne si cu ceea ce mare parte din oameni cred despre ei. Lumea spirituala, in sensul in
care ma refer la ea aici, include si cunostiintele despre lumea materiala, in sens modern stiinta, dar si gnozele si
ideologiile. Acestea au ca materie prima a cercetarii realitatea empirica, dar legitatile ordonatoare a acestor date
sunt prea putin rezultate din observatie. In cadrul unei teorii descriptive partea vulnerabila din acest punct de
vedere ester ipoteza. Aceasta contine in majoritatea cazurilor o radacina a-rationala. Faptul ca o teorie stiintifica
ester confirmat practic prin capacitatile ei predictionale nu infirma defel constatarea precedenta. Se pune doar
problema aproximatiei. Orice teorie, stiintifica sau nu, tinde sa aproximeze cat mai bine realitatea lumii
continatoare - pretentiile de reflectare exacta au fost de atatea ori infirmate. Daca ipotezele ar avea certitudine
absoluta, s-ar putea naste stiinta perfecta. Experienta tempereaza optimismul. Dealtfel, chiar analizand sensul
cuvantului "ipoteza" se poate remarca natura ne-rationala a procesului. Ester vorba de increderea necesara de ati asuma o propunere, care, statistic vorbind, va fi in mod sigur infirmata - chiar daca se demonstreaza in prima
faza eficienta practica - de o noua ipoteza-teorie cu o mai buna aproximare. Ca un bun exemplu al precaritatii
rationale a metodei stiintifice amitite amintesc aici teoria lui Darwin, care, cu trecerea anilor s-a transformat tot
mai mult intr-o dogma, si-a dezvoltat asociatii de credinciosi ce folosesc un intreg arsenal misionar pentru a
mentine nivelul ridicat al catehizarii. Elementele demonstratie initiale au fost pe rand infirmate, dar prevaleaza
exigenta de a propune un inlocuitor inaintea renuntarii definitive.
In cele de mai sus a fost vorba despre stiintele exacte. In cazul celor umaniste, natura axiomatica a ipotezelor
ester inca mai evidenta din cauza puterii de predictie reduse a acestora. Aproximarea eficienta a realitatii ester
(inca) doar un ideal.
Idoli religiosi si arhitecturali. Alaturarea idolilor arhitecturali si religiosi nu ester intamplatoare. Exista doua
tipuri de relatii intre universul religios si cel artistic (arhitectural in cazul de fata). In primul rand se observa o
analogie structurala a premiselor, in sensul celor creionate mai sus. Daca o astfel de structura se intalneste si in
cazul stiintelor exacte, in domeniul artei ea ester determinanta. Confirmarea aproximarii realitatii data de
demonstrarea capacitatilor predictionale ester inaplicabila in acest caz. Fundamentul axiomatic nu poate fi
infirmat in mod absolut, ci poate fi doar pus la indoiala. Dubiul se intemeiaza totusi pe acelasi tip de ipoteze
neconfirmabile rational. Cu trecerea timpului se poate crea impresia ca disputele artistice isi gasesc invingatori,
dar alegerea se face cu concursul precaritatii memoriei si al modului de a intelege cursul istoriei la un moment
dat; se uita adeseori sensul disputei, se ignora contextul. Fenomenul ester comun in istoriografie - istoria se
scrie dintr-un anumit punct de vedere (subiectiv). Analogia poate fi impinsa mai departe, considerand ca
element de referinta panteismul greco-roman antic si dezvoltarea sa etapizata. In prima faza zeii/idolii erau
specifici diferitelor orase si regiuni grecesti, formand niste pseudo-monoteisme locale. Atributele lor se
suprapuneau in buna masura, fiecare pastrand amintirea ipostazei de divinitate suprema primitiva. Aceasta faza
ar corespundei perioadei avangardiste, a intemeierii diverselor curente de inceput de secol 20, moment al
punerii in prim plan a cate unui idol arhitectural, desi sunt acceptati tacit si altii. Ester cazul descompunerii
bidimensionale la neoplasticieni, ai transparentei pentru expresionistii grupului G, sau al puritatii pentru tanarul
Le Corbusier si prietenul sau Ozenfant. In faza a doua, a unificarii culturale a Greciei, se constituie un pantheon
virtual, in cadrul caruia atributele zeilor incep sa fie riguros distribuite, permitand conlucrarea intre acestia.
Procesul de coagulare ester inca in curs de desfasurare, lasand loc si confruntarii. Stilul international, cu
aspectele sale contradictorii, corespunde acestei descrieri. Desi sunt larg acceptate principiile moderniste, cum
ar fi anti-gravitationalitatea (la Wright ori Le Corbusier) sau anorganicitatea, se pot intlani si contrariile
acestora: tectonismul lui Kahn si al realizarilor americane a lui Mies sau organicitatea materialelor lui Wright. A
treia si ultima faza ester reprezentata de alaturarea fizica a idolilor in Pantheonul lui Aggripa (perioada
elenistica). Asperitatile inter-relationarii acestora par a fi rezolvate, dar si puterea de coercitie spirituala s-a
diminuat ireversibil. Incercarea tarzie de codificare a arhitecturii moderne intreprinsa de Bruno Zevi in al sau
Cod Anti-clasic poate fi inteleasa ca un astfel de pantheon al idolilor arhitecturali, iar perioada ce ii corespunde,
continuand si in prezent, ca analoaga celei elenistice. Trecerea maestrilor moderni din activitate in cartile de
istorie echivaleaza cu transformarea acestora in componente ale unui sistem, din necesitati istoriografice si
didactice. Prin intermediul acestei analogii se ilustreaza corespunzator caracterul confuz, caontradictoriu, sau,

dimpotriva, bine structurat al inter-relationarii idolilor arhitecturali moderni. Prezentarea lor independenta ester
doar un rezultat al exigentei de coerenta a discursului. Cronologia indeplineste aceeasi functie. Suprapunerea
anumitor sensuri face necesara reluarea unor argumente in contexte diferite.
Al doilea tip de legatura artistico-religioasa ester directa. Principiile formatoare nu numai ca sunt de aceeasi
natura, ci pot chiar sa coincida. Relatia poate fi exprimata grafic ca o functie descrescatoare de timp. De-a
lungul secolelor 15-18 arta si-a cerut si castigat autonomia fata de comanda si subiectele religioase. La sfarsitul
procesului idolii artistici s-au anti-teizat. Edificatoare pentru proces ester experienta romantica. Promotorii
curentului au profesat un misticism in principiu crestin. Libertatea si autonomia spirituala nu fac insa casa buna
cu misticismul - o astfel de combinatie aluneca cu usurinta in erezie si, uneori, sfarseste in punctul diametral
opus celui de pornire. Ceea ce s-a si intamplat, ratacirile fiind de natura gnostica, marcionista, anti-clericala sau
anti-bisericeasca - semn al tendintei de abstractizare a idolilor. Terenul era propice pentru proliferarea
ideologiilor. Credintele fundamentale ale lumii artistice (europene) au parcurs in perioda moderna traseul
crestinism-gnosticism-ideologie. Voi incerca sa schitez tabloul transformarii cu ajutorul catorva tendinte-idoli
mai importanti. Metoda principala a studiului ester comparatia, ceea ce impune prezenta referintelor extraarhitecturale, sau a celor pre-moderne.Autonomia ester o fateta de drept pozitiv a idealului de la 1789 - libertate.
Principiile revolutionare au fost in totalitate adoptate in domeniul artistic, fiind vazute ca descriind o stare
naturala, de normalitate a universului uman. Explicatia acestei atitudini trebuie cautata pe terenul schitat mai
sus. Dezagregarea s-a produs gradat, dar si in salturi demonstrative. Procesul s-a desavarsit in asa maniera incat,
la inceputul secolului 20, cativa arhitecti si-au putut imagina ca sunt originali cand propuneau sinteza artelor
distinte pe suport arhitectonic, realitate abandonata cu doar un secol in urma. In domeniul muzicii Wagner a vrut
o astfel de regrupare, infaptuita insa in jurul dramei. Existenta alegerii primatului uneia sau alteia dintre arte,
chiar la "reactionarii" ce cred in re-unire, arata masura eficentei despartirii.
Etape ale atomizarii. S-a cerut autonomia artei fata de biserica. Protestantismul a avut o contributie majora in
aceasta directie izgonind arta din cladirea de cult. "Instaurarea tabloului" ca realitate independenta s-a produs in
acest mediu - Olanda secolului 17. De ajutor a fost si dezvoltarea capitalista a societatii occidentale prin aparitia
de noi comanditari. Situatia a favorizat o diversificare a subiectelor/ programelor (dupa renuntarea fortata la
cele religioase in cazul artelor plastice). Arhitectura a ramas legata de biserica doar prin prisma nevoilor
functionale pe care le indeplineste. Noile programe - muzeul, galeria de arta, gradinile peisagere, monumentul,
teatrul, fabrica, institutiile financiare si administrative, garile, stadioanele, s.a. - au oferit terenul nou de
exprimare a castigurilor libertatii. In locul dependentei de comanditarii aristocrati si cei religiosi, care angajau
intreaga gama a artelor plastice la realizarea palatelor si a bisericilor, a aparul dependenta de alte tipuri de
comanditari: colectivitatile de varii tipuri. Aceasta diversificare echivaleaza cu o crestere a independentei.
S-a cerut autonomia artelor intre ele. Inter-relationarea complexa a arhitecturii cu pictura, sculptura si chiar
muzica, impuse de programul ecleziastic a fost privita ca o impurizare reciproca a acestor moduri de expresie.
Au iesit din indistinctie pe aceasta cale si cvasi-anexele de altadata, de tipul graficii sau a caricaturii. Arhitectura
se gaseste intr-o situatie speciala in raport cu aceasta exigenta ideologica, data fiind interdisciplinaritatea
inerenta domeniului, definita cel putin de "utilitas, firmitas, venustas".Astfel ca, daca procesul atomizator se
impinge inlauntrul sferei arhitecturale, ceea ce s-a si intamplat, se pune chiar problema disparitiei acesteia ca
arta. Dilema ester ilustrata corespunzator de binecunoscuta zicere a lui Le Corbusier: "forma urmeaza functiei".
In acest caz extrem proiectarea cladirii se reduce la inginerie - obiectivare a procesului, atitudine corect
stiintifica. Metoda rationala de cunoastere divizeaza intregul in partile componente, pe care le analizeaza pe
indelete. Reconstituirea intregului se face in mod abstract, prin reciprocitate cu divizarea. Idolul a fost urmat si
in aceasta privinta. Aplicarea a dus la o serie de despartiri, urmate de frecvente confuzii intre parte si intreg.
Arhitectura a fost inteleasa succesiv ca geometrie, substanta, material, ornament, suprafata si culoare, functiune,
structura, forma. Aproape orice curent modern a preferat una sau doua elemente ale sistemului. Integrarea
partilor si reconstituirea intregului a ramas totusi marca arhitecturii de calitate.
S-a cerut autonomia artistilor intre ei, ceea ce, in mod practic, se traduce prin nevoia imperioas de originalitate,
ca singurul mod eficient de a distinge intre indivizii creatori. De la exigenta lui Schinkel, inca in logica de
dezvoltare a societatii pre-moderne, ca opera de arta sa contina obligatoriu un element original si pana la
ruperea definitiva cu trecutul proclamata de "Vers une architecture" ester un drum lung in registrul realitatilor
construite si unul foarte scurt pe cale ideologica. Inovatia, noutatea au devenit criteriul axiologic principal. S-a
renuntat de facto la estetica, cel putin in sensul sau de pana atunci si s-a transferat invelisul semantic unor varii

ideologii con-inlocuitoare. O asemenea credinta implica inepuizabilitatea imaginatiei artistice umane, sau, ca
alternativa, disparitia artei prin epuizare. A doua jumatate a secolului trecut poate fi privita ca o inclinare a
balantei in directia celei de a doua optiuni. S-a cerut autonomia artei fata de comanditar/public. Doua tipuri
specifice de locuri (arhitecturale), aparute in epoca, au permis si aceasta ultima desprindere: galeria de arta si
muzeul. Singura arhitectura nu a putut sa faca acest pas, in principal din ratiuni economice si
fizice/gravitationale/functionale. Ea a ramas inevitabil legata de om in dimensiunile sale fizice, psihice si
financiare, desi dimensiunea psihico-afectiva a fost intr-un timp cvasi-ignorata si inlocuita cu organul rational.
Legatura economica ester, defapt, mult mai constrangatoare decat in epocile precedente ca urmare a
pragmatismului noilor comanditari. Definitorie pentru arhitectura actuala ester chiar incercarea de regasire a
omului real, ca unitate/microcosmos, dupa esecul celui stiintific mediu.
Solutia, dar si partial sursa, pentru aceasta specie de autonomie ester stiinta aplicata - masina. Aceasta
inlocuieste artizanatul, prin productia de serie, si face inutila imitarea naturii, cu ajutorul fotografiei. Societatea
industriala in general rezerva un loc incomod si riscant artistului: pe de o parte, nu il mai solicita cu comenzi
ferme - nu ii mai garanteaza un loc de munca, iar, pe de alta parte, promoveaza excesiv artistii ce ating un
anumit nivel de celebritate (dupa impulsul initial vital, procesul ester sinergetic). Navigarea intre cele doua
conditii necesita noroc si cunostiinte de marketing. Indepartarea fata de spectator se face, in practica, prin dezumanizare. Atat alegerea subiectului, cat si modul de tratare a acestuia dau seama de abandonarea valorilor
umane comune, premisa a relationarii cu publicul larg. Subiectul, atunci cand acesta mai exista, este redus la
statutul de pretext al afirmarii artei pure, a individualitatii artistului. Exprimarea acesteia din urma nu are
precedente istorice, de unde rezulta nevoia inventarii de metode, proces echivalent cu o incriptare. Spectatorul
este solicitat din plin in a tine pasul cu complexitatea (sau doar complicatia) sporita ce se naste, iar cel nu poate
aprecia jocuri intelectuale fine abandoneaza lupta dintru inceput. Nu s-a cerut (cel putin nu pe acelasi ton), dar
s-a obtinut oricum autonomia fata de Dumnezeu. Idealul omului liber nu lasa loc atotputerniciei divine. In prima
faza s-a inventat un dumnezeu convenabil, de traditie gnostica, care si-a taiat legaturile cu lumea. Entitatea s-a
depersonalizat, transformandu-se in ratiune la iluministi si in natura sau arta la romantici, de unde se vede ca
drumul de la panteism la monoteism este reversibil. Despartirea de Dumnezeu a ridicat considerabil statutul
social al artistului, ca urmare a transferarii asupra sa a atributului creator. Doar in acest mod este posibila
orginalitatea.
Descompunere si purism. Descompunerea arhitecturii are ca scop declarat rationalizarea componentelor. Un
element arhitectural, conform exigentei puriste, trebuie sa indeplineasca o singura functie; in cazul zidului delimitarea spatiilor. Puritatea se mentine prin extragerea structurii din pereti si dispunerea acesteia, in prima
faza paralel cu peretii, iar apoi complet independent. Dezvoltarea structurii in cadre a permis una din cele mai
celebrate autonomizari intra-arhitecturale - planul liber. Metoda de compunere a fost dezvoltata initial pe cladiri
cu un singur nivel, ceea ce permitea conformarea zvelta a stalpilor, in special a celor metalici, minimalizand
prezenta acestora in cadrul incaperii pana la un nivel la care sistemul structural reprezinta o imbogatire
semantica a spatiului continator. Prototipul acestui mod de aplicare este Pavilionul de la Barcelona a lui Mies
van der Rohe, al carui plan superior/acoperire este sustinut de patru perechi de stalpi metalici cruciformi. In
cazul betonului armat, trebuie mentionata cladirea manifest a lui Le Corbusier de la Poissy, de aceasta data, o
constructie etajata. Ca si in cazul altor principii moderne, dupa debutul cu succes la nivelul realizarilor
maestrilor, aplicarea nediferentiata, semn al irationalitatii raportarii la acestea, a compromis demersul initial.
Zveltetea cadrelor este cheia - sistemul functioneaza corespunzator in cazul unui numar mic de nivele si in zone
ne-seismice, unde aceasta zveltete este posibila. Pe masura ce cadrele capata dimensiuni importante, peretii au
tendinta de a reveni intre stalpi, rezultatul fiind mai rigid decat sistemul cu pereti portanti combatut initial, din
pricina necesitatii dispunerii suportilor intr-o trama strict ortogonala. Prin planul liber s-a incercat
minimalizarea impunerilor structurale asupra spatiilor. Structura propriu-zisa tinde sa fie tratata secundar, cu o
functie strict limitata la sustinere. Autonomia componentelor ofera si o alta cale de urmat, in care structura
capata si valoare formala/simbolica. Arhitectura americana a lui Mies van der Rohe ilustreaza bine aceasta
tendinta, prin intermediul salilor-structura, cum ar fi Crown Hall de la IIT, Chicago. Aceste spatii vaste,
neintrerupte de suporti intermediari si sustinute doar perimetral, se nasc mai degraba dintr-o impunere
ideologica decat dintr-o necesitate functionala: " Stiti, trebuie(!) sa construiesti ceva din care poti face fie un
garaj, fie o catedrala. Aceleasi mijloace, aceleasi metode structurale vor fi folosite pentru ambele lucruri." (Mies
van der Rohe) La capatul procesului de valorizare estetica a structurii pot fi socotite a se afla, pe de o parte,

arhitectura high-tech a scolii londoneze, in ce priveste realizarile metalice, si, pe de alta parte, arhitectura lui
Louis Kahn sau Kenzo Tange, in ce priveste betonul armat. Pe cai diferite, specifice materialului intrebuintat,
cele doua fenomene, contemporane intre ele, pun structura pe primul plan, conformand cladirea in jurul
acesteia. Ordinea stricta a sistemelor structurale intrebuintate pune in relatie stransa valorizarea acestora cu
atentia acordata geometriei. Din punct de vedere formal, descompunerea vizeaza elementele bidimensionale ce
alcatuiesc intregul tridimensional care este constructia. Procedeul este inspirat de pictura cubista si de cea
neoplastica, unde insa, tridimensionalitatea la care se renunta se gasea doar la nivel de reprezentare.
Dimpotriva, in cazul arhitecturii, descompunerea bidimensionla este doar sugerata, prin manipularea
suprafetelor alcatuite din materiale diferite si prin folosirea consolelor. Tridimensionalitatea poate fi infranta
doar in cazul renuntarii la interioritate - monumentul arhitectural. Este situatia cunoscutului pavilion al lui Mies.
Procedeul descompunerii a fost riguros descris de conferinta lui Frank L. Wright cu privire la "spargerea cutiei"
si se refera la: retragerea sprijinelor (peretilor) din colturi si din perimetrul invelitorii (rezulta console), tratarea
diferentiata a peretilor prin prelungirea unora in afara acestui perimetru sau varierea inaltimii. Aceasta metoda
pleaca de la premisa ca materialitatea sticlei poate fi neglijata si este in relatie directa cu punerea intre paranteze
a constrangerii gravitationale.
A-contextualitatea. O specie de autonomie specifica arhitecturii este cea fata de context. "Imperativul"
schimbarii, al ruperii cu obisnuintele, are o greutate incomparabila, in balanta moderna, fata de preocuparile
pentru integritatea armonioasa a mediului, in special urban. Infatisarea oraselor de pe cele mai diverse
meridiane ne face sa ne gandim la o globalizare avant-la-lettre, avand in vedere varsta, daja respectabila, a
stilului international. In cadrul limbajului arhitectural modern se poate face o distinctie intre raspunsul la
context al cladirilor de beton fata de cele de otel si sticla. Acestea din urma (sau aparenta lor transferata
betonului) au actionat ca motor al uniformizarii de-contextualizatoare, fiind intrinsec conditionate formal de
slabele posibilitati de modelare, de saracia semantica. Cu un spatiu restrans de manevra, arhitectura de otel si
sticla a trebuit sa se bazeze pe detalii, pe virtuozitati de compozitie tehnica. Metoda a dat roade remarcabile in
cazul talentelor exceptionale, ca Mies van der Rohe sau sir Norman Foster, dar a esuat pe scara larga intr-un
conformism mai rigid decat cel academist, combatut initial. Betonul, pe de alta parte, a permis adaptari la
context, ilustrate adecvat de lucrarile coloniale ale lui Le Corbusier si Louis Kahn al Chandigarh, respectiv
Dhaka. Si in aceste cazuri se poate face o distinctie intre tipurile de adaptare: la conditiile climatice in primul
caz si pe calea unui primitivism formal (universal uman, dupa cum par sa demonstreze studiile de arheologie si
etnologie) in cel de-al doilea caz. Cele doua exceptii, ivite spre sfarsitul carierei celor doi maestri moderni, par a
fi si o reconsiderare a universalitatii retetelor internationaliste de inceput.
Functiunea. Autonomia zonelor functionale reprezinta o alta fateta a procesului. Separarea functiunilor in cadrul
cladirii este bine ilustrata de cladirea Bauhaus-ului de la Dessau, de Walter Gropius: caminul studentesc este
despartit de corpurile educationale atat ca pozitie cat si din punct de vedere formal - goluri "impuscate" in
fatada vs. perete cortina. In general, separarea functiunilor la acest nivel a fost vazuta ca o modalitate adecvata
de motivare a compozitie volumetrice. In acest sens, specificitatea functiunilor, inteleasa in sens largit fata de
cel strict functionalist, a fost creditata cu determinarea unei vaste diversitati formale. Functia impune forma, dar,
datorita particularitatilor functionale, forma variaza conform idealului modern al diferentei, dand nastere unui
numar practic nelimitat de solutii. Lasand la o parte teoria, functiunea s-a dovedit a fi mai uniforma decat se
preconiza, lips suplinit de speculatia formala manierista. Al doilea nivel de autonomie functionala se aplica
intregului oras. Printr-un exercitiu de deconstructie urbana, componentele pana atunci inter-relationate, ca strada
si cladirea, sunt disociate in vederea unei recombinari purificate. Legaturile dintre aceste componente se reduc
la minimul functional acceptabil. Puse in practica in multe orase europene, zonele mono-functionale s-au
dovedit a fi fundamental diferite de modul in care intelegeau cetatenii ca ar trebui sa arate orasul lor.
Urbanismul bazat pe "nevoia" ideologica de autonomie functionala a fost cea mai mare neimplinire a miscarii
arhitecturale moderne.
Anti-gravitational. Analizand individual parti ale cladirii, dupa metoda stiintifica de cuoastere, arhitectii
moderni au descoperit posibilitati multiple de schimbare la acest nivel. Majoritatea acestor idei se vadeau
inaplicabile odata cu reasamblarea componentelor. Dificultatile intampinate in acest proces (de unde se vad si
pericolele judecatii analogice excesiv de abstracte) au dus la intelegerea realitatilor naturale ale arhitecturii ca
premise constrangatoare. Inaintea perioadei moderne arhitectii erau constienti de datele naturale - fie si pe cale
experimentala, prin prabusirea boltilor prea indaraznete de exemplu - dar nu se incerca (pseudo-) ignorarea lor.

O catedrala gotica, in ciuda dimensiunilor sale impresionante, pastreaza amintirea masurii omului prin
intermediul ornamentului. Structura gotica transmite intr-un mod clar, chiar daca relativ complex, incarcarile
proprii si purtate la pamant, nici un element al sau nefiind exacerbat in detrimentul celorlalte - sa spunem bolta
asupra suportilor verticali. Principala constrangere/limitare a libertatii depline cautate este gravitatia. Odata
constatarea facuta, logica autonomiei si-a facut simtita prezenta. Cum atractia Pamantului nu poate fi
(deocamdata, cel putin) ignorata, ramanea doar disimularea acestei necesitati fizice absolute - cladirea nu va
pluti, dar macar va parea ca face acest lucru. Dupa negarea unor obisnuite umane - traditia, stilurile - s-a trecut
si la negarea obisnuintelor naturale. Inca odata ideologia a fost cu un pas inaintea tehnicii. Antigravitationalitatea poate fi zarita pentru prima data la sfarsitul secolului 18, cu mult mai devreme decat aparitia
materialelor ce au permis o dezvoltare reala in aceasta directie. Pe masura ce tehnicile de constructie au
progresat, pretentiile utopistilor au crescut. Daca s-a inceput cu sfera asezata precar (dar totusi asezata) a lui
Ledoux, la inceputul secolului 20 Tatlin a propus suspendarea sferei - sala de congrese in interiorul
monumentului sau pentru a treia Internationala. Mai departe pe aceasta scara se gasesc propuneri pentru intregi
orase ale caror locuitori nu trebuie sa puna vreodata piciorul pe pamant. Motivatii pentru aceasta ne-ceruta de
nimeni simplificare se gasesc: mai multa vegetatie, agricultura, eficienta economica (?!), separarea de industrie,
ne-opturarea vederii panoramice. Sursa comuna este totusi usor de recunoscut. Modalitatile de apropiere de
acest ideal sunt cuprinse in programul modernismului: cunoscutii piloti ai lui Le Corbusier, scoaterea in consola
a planseelor (Wright), sprijinirea aparenta a unor volume "grele" pe materiale fragile, de tipul sticlei, retragerea
structurii din planul fatadei, agatarea (fabricile lui Norman Foster), reversibilitatea formelor (pavilionul de la
Barcelona al lui Mies van der Rohe fata de orizontala marcata pe blocul central de onyx). O cladire ale carei
fatade pot fi privite indiferent de directia scrisului de pe plansa si-a indeplinit misiunea de eliberare fata de,
dupa caz, tirania sau banalitatea gravitatiei.
Originalitatea. In intelesul pre-modern, originalitatea poate fi obtinuta prin recombinarea si reinterpretarea
modelelor. Noul este urmare a inspiratiei. Aceasta presupune ajutor din partea altora - a lui Dumnezeu (postul
inaintea construirii unei biserici) si/sau a inaintasilor. In acest sistem schimbarea se produce treptat,
exteriorizare a stabilitatii. Sursa inspiratiei este la lumina, usor de gasit. Susceptibila de a deveni sursa de
inspiratie este aproape exclusiv forma, datorita relativei omogenitati a sistemelor de valori. In contrapunct,
modernitatea este mai inclinata in a prelua sursa ideologica a modelului, ceea ce se inscrie in logica cercetarii
analitice. Avantajul acestei metode este chiar posibilitatea mentinerii originalitatii, inteleasa preponderent
formal. Cladirile academiste ale lui Schinkel si Semper si arhitectura de otel si sticla a lui Mies van der Rohe
pot fi intelese ca derivand, pe cale ideologica, una din alta, pentru ca, si doar pentru ca Mies a recunoscut
afinitatile programatice comune, sugerate de inaintasi. La o analiza pur formala alaturarea nu ar avea sens.
Dilema da seama, pe de alta parte, de o problema fundamentala a ideologiei ca purtatoare a mesajului
arhitectural - prin incriptari si decriptari succesive acesta se schimba radical si nu numai din punct de vedere
formal. Acest fapt evident pentru exemplele mentionate, ce sunt despartite de aproximativ un secol, ramane
adevarat si pentru realizari contemporane intre ele si inrudite ideologic (partial) ca cele datorate lui Louis Kahn
si Buckminster Fuller. Problema originalitatii este in mod deosebit lamuritoare atat pentru originile cat si pentru
multe din nereusitele arhitecturii moderne. Intre inspiratie si copiere ca metode de proiectare exista o diferenta
de natura si nu de grad. In timp ce prima contine obligatoriu o farama de originalitate (in sens modern), cea de-a
doua nu face decat sa reasambleze elemente, golite de sens pe aceasta cale. "A crea in spirit istoric nu inseamna
a mentine sau a repeta vechiul; in acest fel istoria ar pieri; a actiona istoric inseamna a aduce noul prin care
istoria va fi continuata.(...) istoria nu a copiat niciodata o istorie precedenta, si atunci cand a facut-o, un
asemenea act nu este retinut de istorie, istoria incetand intr-o anumita masura chiar prin actul insusi" (Karl
Friedrich Schinkel). Tocmai lipsa de vitalitate a stilurilor academiste a stimulat originalitatea revolutionara
moderna. Ruptura stilistica a arhitecturii moderne cu trecutul s-a produs in doua etape. In prima faza, prin
constatarea posibilitatii de alegere intre diferite stiluri istorice, la inceputul secolului 19, s-a intrerupt
continuitatea evolutiei stilistice. Dupa o suta de ani, in care acest exercitiu a relativizat importanta traditiei in
construire, abandonarea completa a referintelor stilistice a devenit o optiune viabila teoretic.
Inlocuirea principiilor. Tabula-rasa nu se refera insa doar al problema stilistica, ci la fenomenul arhitectural in
ansamblu. Diversele componente ale acestuia au facut pasul in etape succesive: materialele noi - otelul, betonul
si sticla - in ce priveste "firmitas", programele noi, in ce priveste "utilitas". Principiile compozitionale,
invariante de-a lungul secolelor, s-au dovedit cel mai greu de inlaturat. Simetria, ritmul, armonia sunt specifice

arhitecturii in general, si nu anumitor stiluri. Opusele lor - asimetria, aritmia, disonanta - se intalnesc,
deasemenea, inca de la inceputuri. Principiile antinomice colaboreaza intru succesul ansamblurilor recunoscute
din toate timpurile. Pe Acropola Atenei, Parthenonul este simetric, iar Erectheionul si propileele nu. Casele
Perugiei sunt in general rectangulare si au fatadele ritmate, dar alaturararea lor da nastere la strazi si piete
conformate liber si cu ritm sincopat, dat de dimensiunile diferite ale componentelor.
Purismul modern, considerat de la originile sale de secol 19, este responsabil de optiunea exclusivista pentru
unul din elementele aparent opuse ale binoamelor amintite. In secolul 19 s-a ales latura ordonata - simetria.
Ceea ce, in aceeasi logica polarizatoare, a facut modernismul sa opteze pentru latura haotica. Schimbarea nu se
mai produce treptat (desi perioada art-nouveau poate fi inteleasa ca o faza intermediara) ci dintr-odata, fapt care
este un indicator al masurii in care aceasta schimbare (nu) se impunea - in sensul in care nici o schimbare
sociala majora nu se cere si nu se produce liber in conditii de urgenta. Experientele politice revolutionare sunt
mai mult decat edificatoare si tabla stearsa in arhitectura este o schimbare poate cu mai mare impact social fata
de cea politica.
Motivare ideologica. Tabula-rasa este considerata a fi principiu etic, fapt care ii contureaza suficient statutul de
idol, in lipsa vreunei constrangeri morale sau practice. Haosul rezultat prin acest procedeu este, la randul sau,
asumat si "sacrosant", in asteptarea re-creatiunii. Creatia ex-nihilo pare la indemana arhitectului demiurg. Dar
cum tocmai ordinea este menita distrugerii in acest proces, creatia preconizata nu mai depaseste faza haotica, ci
o valorizeaza ca principiu estetic. Pornirea de la zero este posibila doar la nivel ideologic. In realitate, artistul nu
poate face abstractiune de mediul sau, sau, mai ales, de educatia "pe linie" pe care a primit-o. Astfel ca,
rezultatul unei asemenea incercari nu este aparitia unei noi sinteze, ci negarea, punct cu punct, a celei vechi.
Referitor la plasarea unei ferestre, Bruno Zevi recomanda: "oriunde in alta parte". Dupa stergerea tablei nu se
mai iau in considerare toate solutiile posibile, ci doar cele ne-istovite de intrebuintare. Libertatea cautata nu
permite totusi intoarcerea, nici macar selectiva, la vechile principii. Acestea sunt definitiv proscrise, indiferent
de conditiile specifice unui anumit proiect. Dealtfel, intregul exercitiu este pur ideologic - unui nou oras ii vor fi
necesari oameni noi, reformati. Pentru cetateanul est-european aceasta exigenta este familiara, iar simpatiile
socialiste ale unora din marii arhitecti moderni nu sunt intamplatoare. Motivarea luptei impotriva regulilor este
facilitata de etichetarea acestora ca tabuuri - interdictii ce nu isi au locul intr-o societate laicizata (dar fac casa
buna cu democratia aplicata). Coercititivitatea regulilor vizate functiona doar la nivel conventional, fiind sporita
doar de codificarea academista. Doar anti-regulile moderne ating un nivel mai ridicat de impunere, prin
coerenta intrinseca a ideologiilor pe care le reprezinta.
Geometrie sacra. Universuri spirituale atat de indepartate precum cele crestine sau hinduse, daoiste sau islamice
au utilizat geometria primara ca mijloc de a traduce in semn notiuni fundamentale ale sistemelor de credinte.
Patratul, triunghiul si mai ales cercul au, in varii traditii, valori spirituale de prim rang si surprinzator de
asemanatoare. Asocierea geometriei cu credinta, realizata prin intermediul numarului, transcede limitele
religiilor particulare si se arata ca o constanta a spiritualitatii. Geometria este si un simbol/paradigma a ratiunii,
cu care are multe caracteristici comune: abstractiunea, perfectiunea, ierarhizarea, metoda analitica. Geometria
este o arta a ratiunii. Atunci cand, in secolul luminilor, ratiunea nu a mai fost doar un ajutor ala credintei - ca in
cazul sfantului Toma d'Aquino - ci a devenit insusi obiectul acesteia, cele doua ipostaze mentionate s-au
suprapus. Geometria a devenit subiect al veneratiei pentru modul in care reflecta alcatuirea universului.
Arhitectura foloseste in general partea pragmatica a geometriei. Nu orice forma este potrivita pentru construire
sau utilizare umana. Tocmai formele cu semnificatie spirituala, formele primare devin rareori cladiri. Cercul (in
doua dimensiuni) si sfera (in trei) simbolizeaza perfectiunea divina. Din punctul de vedere al epistemologiei
stiintifice le regasim precum corpuri ceresti si trasee ale acestora prin spatiu; extrapoland (modalitate de
cunoastere nu rareori(!) intalnita in epoca) se ajunge la o concluzie evident apropiata de cea religioasa: sfera ca
manifestare a divinitatii. Este insa vorba de Dumnezeul filosofilor, entitate principiu, depersonalizata, fara
legatura activa cu lumea. Sfera are o cariera arhitecturala indelungata, cu origini pre-istorice - acoperisurile
colibelor primitive. Simbolismul religios si cel arhitectural s-au suprapus, pe cat se pare, inca de la inceput. Dar,
pana in secolul 18, sfera a fost folosita doar partial, sub forma de calota, cel mai des emisfera. Pantheonul
roman pare sa fie o usoara exceptie; sfera inscrisa in interiorul sau este insa doar sugerata si, poate deaceea,
raspunde in mai mare masura sensibilitatii contemporane. Proiectul lui C.N. Ledoux pentru cimitirul de la
Chaux graviteaza in jurul primei sfere perfecte arhitecturale. Interiorul acesteia, inaccesibil omului, poate fi
doar privit. Spatiul sferic inutilizabil este o ofranda si un loc de cult al idolului geometric, in acest caz de natura

htoniana - caracterul programului si tehnologia epocii - simbolizand vesnicia, o alta fateta a idolului abstract.
Lumina patrunde in sfera francezului prin intermediul unui oculus central, similar Pantheonului. Apropierea nu
este intamplatoare - templul politeist roman este modelul preferat al iubitorilor de arhitectura geometrica.
Edificiul sferic al lui Ledoux se inrudeste indeaproape cu mai cunoscutul proiect al conationalului si
contemporanului sau Etienne-Louis Boullee pentru cernotaful lui Isaac Newton. Ca o aluzie la munca celebrului
fizician, calota superioara a sferei urma sa fie perforata dupa o harta cereasca trasata pe suprafata sa, astfel incat
efectul rezultat sa reprezinte cerul instelat. Interiorul spatiului sferic prezinta aceeasi inaccesibilitate. Boullee isi
justifica astfel optiunea: "corpul sferic este, sub toate raporturile, imaginea perfectiunii; figura sa este desenata
de catre conturul cel mai ageabil." Geometria corpurilor primare este privita ca un dat natural suprem, ceea ce
transfera asupra ei caracterul divin al naturii: "O, natura, cat e de adevarat a spune ca tu esti cartea cartilor,
stiinta universala! Noi nu putem nimic fara de tine!". Arhitectul francez propune chiar adorarea naturii, intr-un
templu (sferic) al carui proiect l-a intocmit. Plecand de la credinta manifesta in alcatuirea geometrica a
universului si-a construit Buckminster Fuller noua sa disciplina, sinergetica. Sfera nu mai este doar forma
perfect arhitecturala ci reprezinta si structura perfecta - sistemul tridimensional tetraedric. Acesta rezulta, cel
putin ideologic, din pozitia relativa a sferelor ce ocupa cat mai eficient un volum dat. Unind centrele acestora se
obtine tocmai structura tetraedrica. Domul geodezic imbina forma si structura sferica. Lumina ce patrunde liber
prin structura reticulata a dus la o schimbare simbolica radicala fata de Ledoux - domul geodezic repezinta viata
si este (cel putin programatic) autosuficient in sustinerea ei. Fuller a mers pana la capat in adorarea geometrie,
compunand o varianta sinergetica a rugaciunii Tatal nostru: "Tetraedrul nostru care esti in geometrie (...)
sistemul tau fie dom, atat pe Pamant cat si in Univers (...) amin." Sinagoga Mikveh Israel a lui Louis Kahn reface legatura intre universul spiritual religios si geometrie. Planul acesteia ia forma simbolului cabalistic prin
excelenta - arborele Sephirot. Acesta pune in valoare tot alcatuirea geometrica a universului, de aceasta data din
perspectiva gnostica, prin structurarea ierarhica a unui numar de cercuri.
Arta si geometrie. Arta pura, "curatita" de constrangerile anterioare autonomizarii, dar mai ales de cele
religioase, nu mai are conexiuni directe cu exigenta de ordonare superioara. Prezenta acesteia este o optiune
bine precizata a anumitor curente - constructivismul, purismul - , pe cand absenta acesteia este asumata raspicat,
pe linie polarizatoare, de alte miscari artistice - cubismul, expresionismul, supra-realismul, sau, mai nou,
deconstructivismul. Relevanta pentru domeniul arhitecturii este gandirea lui Le Corbusier.
Puristii privesc arta din perspectiva psihologica (stiintifica). Ceea ce impresioneaza individul la nivelul cel mai
profund trebuie sa constituie baza noii arte. Plecand de la o generalizare abuziva a unor rezultate ale psihologiei
experimentale si de la impactul artei negre asupra europenilor de inceput de secol 20, s-a dorit intemeierea unei
arte care sa corespunda in mod stiintific nevoilor spirituale ale omului. Cheia adaptarii la aceste nevoi ar fi
figurile/corpurile geometrice elementare: cercul/sfera, patratul/cubul, sau triunghiul/conul. Ordinea pe care
acestea o intruchipeaza este considerata a fi o constanta umana, o premisa a emotiei-tip: "Toate satisfactiile de
ordin plastic rezulta din sistemul geometriei.", sau: "omul este un animal geometric", sau: "Formele geometriei
simple produc asupra noastra efectul cel mai pur. Dispunem astfel de o claviatura fiziologica ale carei
proprietati sensibile le cunoastem." (L.C.). Ca si in cazul altor idoli arhitecturali, concluzia indeplineste si rolul
de ipoteza, precedand demonstratia. Aceasta din urma se desprinde cu usurinta din studiul istoric, atata vreme
cat stim ce sa cautam. Aceeasi mult discutata Acropola a Atenei serveste in demonstrarea universalitatii atat a
ordinii geometrice , la Le Corbusier, cat si a disonantei, a-ritmiei sau asimetriei, la Bruno Zevi. De notat ca cel
de-al doilea, schimband cheia ideologica, nu constata o contradictie in cele de mai sus si se considera un
continuator al celui dintai. Fiecare ideologie asimileaza valori recunoscute pentru intemeierea propriilor
concluzii. Prin decontextualizare, un anumit lucru poate avea, dupa cum s-a vazut, intelesuri contrare.
Dupa ce ordinea geometrica este inscaunata, totul, mai ales retroactiv (pentru siguranta) se raporteaza la ea.
Procesul se desfasoara treptat, prin determinare deductiva: "Natura nu este frumoasa decat prin raportare la arta.
Daca din intamplare ea este ordonata, ne apare frumoasa, atunci ea este asemeni unei opere de arta" (L.C).
Analog cu constatarea post-moderna, edificiul arhitectural se recepteaza la nivele diferite, in functie de
cunostiintele relevante in materie ale privitorului/utilizatorului. Pendularea intre sensurile exo- si ezoterice s-a
desfasurat neliniar de-a lungul intregii istorii a arhitecturii. Cladirea gotica, spre exemplu, in afara nivelului
receptarii formale, poate fi inteleasa si prin intermediul influentei gandirii scolastice, cu care are in comun
structurarea ierarhica, valorizarea luminii-rationalitate. Deasemenea, corporatiile de constructori (masoni) au
incifrat in piatra ipostaze si simboluri divine si de breasla, intelese prin prisma unei mistici a edificarii.

Diferitele moduri de transmitere a mesajului conlucreaza intru acelasi scop, alcatuiesc un tot unitar. Prin
aplecarea ei catre formal, arhitectura secolelor 18-19 ignora in mare parte posibilitatea/prilejul comunicarii
simbolice, pe linia rationalitatii eliberate a luminilor. Epoca moderna face si aici dovada rupturii cu trecutul
(imediat). Cu mare rapiditate s-a ajuns pe pozitii opuse: arhitectura se incripteaza in cheie ideologica sau
gnostica. Mesajul isi pierde in parte caracterul sau ezoteric, de vreme ce programele curentelor artistice sunt
publice. Simptomul relevant al ignorarii voite a nivelului receptarii formale (autonomia fata de public) este
renuntarea la, si chiar incriminarea ornamentului. Publicul de arhitectura neavizat de inceput de secol 20 se
gaseste in situatia emigrantului dotat cu dictionar - are in principiu cheia, dar practic nu o poate utiliza eficient.
Tot ce poate face este sa astepte ca timpul si obisnuinta sa remedieze situatia.
Raportarea la modele. Arhitectura moderna isi declara raspicat umanismul - aceasta este cea mai potrivita
directie de canalizare a potentialitatilor libertatii. Opozitia fata de clasicismul academist se deceleaza si in acest
plan: individul uman este complex si nu poate fi satisfacut, intregit ca persoana de un limbaj arhitectural rigid,
neschimbator. Dupa aceasta faza a constatarii, in logica evolutiva, s-ar cauta mijloace potrivite de iesire din
impas, prin schimbare treptata. Ideologia revolutionara moderna are un alt tratament la diagnosticul pus: orice
altceva este de preferat situatiei actuale, sau, mai radical, se cauta exact opusul deprinderilor constructive in
exercitiu. S-a utilizat pana acum simetria - se recomanda asimetria; s-a cautat armonia - se recomanda
disonanta. Acest tip de schimbare nu tine cont de relatiile fundamentale ale fiintei umane cu mediul, sfarsind, in
aceeasi ordine negativista, in anti-umanism. Omul se raporteaza la mediu prin intermediul modelelor
individuale, dar similare in spatiu cultural comun. Aceasta suma de experiente si informatii alcatuiesc un tot
unitar si ordonat, din pricina aplecarii intrinsec umane de cosmologizare a faptului brut perceput. Orice noua
informatie este comparata cu acest sistem de cunostinte si integrata acestuia pe doua cai:
1. In cazul in care sunt posibile analogii cu vreo componenta a bazei de date existenta, se produce o integrare
ordonata, ierarhica; adaugirea nu afecteaza coerenta sistemului. Modelele au si valoare axiologica, si, deci, o
orientare. In masura in care noua informatie corespunde inclinatiei de valorizare a sistemului, aceasta este
acceptata ca o modalitate de destindere a unor tensiuni pre-existente. Acesta este modul cel mai fericit in care o
inovatie arhitecturala poate fi receptata de catre public/utilizatori. Esenta problemei este cunoasterea de catre
autor a situatiei curente a modelelor culturale relevante. Ceea ce nu presupune urmarea intocmai a obisnuintelor
de functionare ale respectivului sistem, ci doar exploatarea potentialitatilor sale.
2. In cazul in care noua informatie nu poate fi asemanata, comparata cu nici un element existent anterior,
aceasta este deasemenea integrata, dar sub forma de paradox, de ciudatenie. Situatia este profund suparatoare
pentru receptor, pentru ca sistemul (modelul) isi pierde coerenta. Problema este cu atat mai mare cu cat
respectivul element este situat in sfera activa, direct experimentabila, a mediului receptorului. Altfel spus,
ciudateniile sunt acceptabile ca informatie si respinse ca experiment. La aparitia unui nou element/paradox din
aceeasi familie cu primul apare o categorie si sunt posibile analogiile. Dupa o serie relevanta dimensional, fata
de intinderea sistemului, de astfel de elemente, categoria se integreaza cu succes modelului, sporindu-i
complexitatea - procesul se numeste simplu: obisnuinta. Mecanismul cunoasterii integratoare schitat aici, desi
general uman, este poate cel mai bine ilustrat de metoda de cunoastere a stintelor naturii - in acest caz insa,
aplicat constient si rational, deci mai usor controlabil.
Arta moderna a impus ca unic criteriu al valorii estetice socul epistemologic provocat de elementele integrabile
ca paradoxuri. Acestea au "explicatii", motivari ideologice, care nu acopera insa prapastia creata, de aceasta
axiologie, intre artisti si publicul incapacitat in asimilare. "Desconsiderarea totala a tot ceea ce exista (...),
aceasta predilectie si incurajare a schimbarii care, in cele din urma nu lasa timp nici unui lucru sa fie cunoscut si
gustat, sunt un indiciu sigur al desertaciunii caracterului epocii si al celor ce-i stau in frunte." (K.F. Schinkel).
Distinctia in doua puncte de mai sus se refera, din punct de vedere arhitectural, la trei tipuri de modele: formal,
antropometric si functional-simbolic. Toate aceste laturi ale fenomenului arhitectural trebuiesc sa raspunda
asteptarilor publicului/utilizatorilor, situatie asimilabila unei ecuatii cu multe necunoscute. Au fost propuse trei
variante de rezolvare: prin urmarea formala a modelelor (linia traditionala), prin impunerea de principii
ideologice rezultate din cunoasterea "stiintifica" a omului (solutia moderna) si prin studiul in profunzime a
exemplelor de succes, la nivel direct, experimental, selectarea acestora si intelegerea modelelor culturale (teoria
situationista)." Precedentul este cheia schimbarii cu adevarat umaniste. Prin ignorarea/negarea acestuia
arhitectura moderna a suprimat premisele unei integrari normale in modelele formale, antropometrice si
functional-simbolice specifice epocii. Noutatea ar fi trebuit acceptata doar pe baza coincidentei sistemelor

axiologice ale arhitectilor si publicului, presupusa evidenta, datorita actionarii in "spiritul epocii". Inaintarea
independenta a arhitectilor pe drumul motivarii ideologice a inovatiei echivaleaza cu o incifrare de facto a
mesajului cu o cheie presupus universala.
Radacini stiintifice. Renuntarea la credinta religioasa a lasat un loc liber in zona fundamentelor spirituale.
Inlocuitoarea de drept, prin victorie directa, este stiinta. Progresul stiintific a putut fi inteles ca progres general
uman si a facilitat grefarea unor teorii stiintifice pe fundamente gnostice, dand nastere ideologiilor masiniste.
Polarizarea si dialectica sunt definitorii pentru metoda stintifica de cercetare. Din aceasta sursa teoretica,
asumata sau nu, se inspira si extremismul avangardei artistice. A doua sursa este, evident, nevoia acuta de
originalitate. Polarizarea extrema in arhitectura poate fi reprezentata de casa-ornament art-noveau si
contemporana "Ornament si crima " de Adolf Loos. Exista o ne-sincronicitate a fenomenelor, dar doar partiala,
insuficienta pentru a le considera etape succesive ale istoriei artei. Stilul art-noveau este ultima manifestare a
vechiului mod de a gandi edificarea. Pentru ultima oara si ca un fenomen izolat in secolele 19 si 20, cladirea a
format un tot unitar cu decoratia sa. In cazul extrem - Gaudi - decoratia a devenit cladire, zidul nu a mai fost
doar un suport al acesteia. Cu toate acestea, gratie substantei profund inovatoare, stilulul este puternic ancorat in
modernitate si nu are legaturi cu istoricismul. Privind retrospectiv, decoratia nu a fost abandonata definitiv, ci sa manifestat periodic in stiluri ca art-deco sau postmodernism, aratandu-ne astfel locul pe care il ocupa intre
nevoile spirituale. Cu timpul ornamentul s-a indepartat radical de cladire, devenind, in ultima instanta, un nou
exemplu al extremismului artistic - cladiri perfect moderniste "imbunatatite" cu ingredientul cel mai urat de
modernisti.
Sfarsitul istoriei. O urmare a extremismului polarizarii prin cautarea originalitatii este relatia temporala in
continua schimbare intre curentele sucesive si audienta de care se bucura acestea. La inceputurile perioadei
moderne ciclurile de viata ale diverselor curente se suprapuneau relativ putin (exista exceptii). Optiunile
programatice ale unora puteau fi intelese ca reactie la optiunile ideologice materializate ale celorlalti, in logica
revolutionara. In aceste conditii se mai putea vorbi de stil, in intelesul sau integrator. Cu timpul insa s-au
contestat direct programele curentelor in formare, ajungandu-se pana la simultaneitatea actiunii si reactiunii si
apoi la imposibilitatea existentei de curente cu baza ideologica manifesta. Atomizarea s-a produs pana la nivelul
individual, sau, rareori, al unor scoli de arhitectura. Asistam acum la o situatie multipolara care, prin ocuparea
unui spectru mai larg de pozitii, duce la aplanarea contradictiilor relative. Este situatia care indreptateste pe
Alexandru Paleologu sa spuna ca post-modernismul inseamna sfarsitul istoriei. Contradictorie este si atitudinea
modernista cu privire la relatia arhitecturii cu mediul (ma refer aici la cel natural). Conformarea geometrica,
abstractizanta combinata cu anti-gravitationalitatea nu lasa loc de dialog contextual. Obiectul arhitectural este,
chiar programatic, atopic. Utilizarea masiva a transparentei creaza insa premisele unei continuitati intre spatiile
interioare si exterioare inaccesibila inaintasilor. La intalnirea celor doua componente se afla natura abstractizata,
redusa la elementar si conformata numeric din proiectele lui Tadao Ando. Egalitarismul stilistic intre programe
poate fi inteles, in sine, dar si prin formele pe care le-a produs, ca o fateta a polarizarii. La inceputul secolului
19, corespunzator utopistilor ce intrevedeau societati alcatuite doar din regi, a existat o tendinta de adoptare a
formelor muzeului/templu la cladiri de importanta secundara, cum ar fi barierele Parisului - egalizarea "in sus".
Dupa un secol, o constructie utilitara cum erau garajul lui Auguste Perret din strada Ponthieu sau uzinele Fagus
ale lui Walter Gropius au putut fi recunoscute drept modele arhitecturale. Stilul international nu mai permitea o
tratare speciala a programelor in functie de reprezentativitate sociala sau sit. Simplificarea geometrica este
echivalenta unei egalizari "in jos". Polarizarea gandirii la Le Corbusier: "nici o ratiune practica sau superioara
nu poate scuza sau explica iconolatria. (...) Sa fim iconoclasti". De notat si prezumtia de vinovatie aplicata
iconolatriei, prin inversiunea in ordinea normala a explicatiei (apararii) si scuzelor (vinovatiei).
Muzeul. Perioada de glorie, de prestigiu maxim a muzeelor se asociaza inceputurilor independente ale
programului (dupa depasirea fazei galeriilor particulare - de amatori) in prima jumatate a secolului 19. La
momentul respectiv muzeul era perceput a fi o institutie progresista si, in acelasi timp, ii fusese transferata o
aura spirituala aparte - templu al artelor. Desi slabit la sfarsitul perioadei, impulsul muzeificator si-a pastrat pana
in prezent o vitalitate de invidiat pentru statutul sau actual conservator. El se manifesta in doua directii: 1.Multe
dintre realizarile reprezentative ale marilor maestrii moderni sunt muzee (Guggenheim Museum, la New York,
de Frank L. Wright, Neue Nationalgalerie, la Berlin, de L. Mies van der Rohe, sau Muzeul de arta Kimbell, din
Forth Worth, Texas, de Louis I. Kahn). si 2. O serie impresionanta, prin numar si varietate, de cladiri istorice isi
pierd sau augmenteaza functiunea initiala spre castigul celei muzeale. Cea de-a doua categorie include palate,

resedinte princiare sau aristocratice, case memoriale, sau chiar biserici si fabrici.
La polul opus fata de aceasta tendinta muzeificatoare se gaseste programul urbanistic modernist. Innoirea totala
preconizata nu las loc istoriei orasului. Demolarea catedralelor este solutia lui Le Corbusier. Daca francezul nu a
reusit sa-si aplice ideile distructive, Hitler a actionat in aceasta directie (pe pamant englezesc), dar din cu totul
alt motiv. Raidurile aeriene supranumite Baedeker, dupa un cunoscut ghid turistic al vremii, au vizat cladiri
istorice insemnate, recunoscand astfel valoarea lor simbolica pentru oras si moralul locuitorilor sai.
Diferenta dintre codurile arhitecturale pre-moderne si moderne in ce priveste gradul de constrangere si eficienta
impunerii este analoaga distinctiei creionate in introducere intre sistemele de credinte religioase (cel crestin, in
speta), pe de o parte, si gnostice si ideologice, pe de alta parte.
Limitele codificarii. Asemanarea este data, in primul rand, de intinderea domeniului legiferat. Tratatele
renascentiste si modelul lor vitruvian, de exemplu, codifica aproape exclusiv ordinele arhitecturale - in termeni
moderni: decoratia fatadei. Normativele sunt foarte precise, ceea ce nu ii impiedica nici chiar pe autorii lor sa se
abata de la ele cand ochiul artistului o cere. Precizia prescriptiilor are trei surse: imperativul de a transmite
nealterat etalonul de frumusete, asupra caruia exista un consens in epoca; o mistica neo-pitagoreica a numarului
iradiata asupra arhitectilor atat de surse laice umaniste cat si de surse religioase; nevoia de rationalizare pentru
usurinta descrierii. Esential pentru codificarea pre-moderna este ca se transcriu pe hartie modele traditionale,
verificate de experienta si ca aceste tratate acopera foarte putin din intinderea domeniului arhitectural,
considerat chiar si in sens vitruvian. Din aceste motive, impactul negativ al manierismului provocat de astfel de
lucrari a avut o amploare relativ scazuta. Teoria de arhitectura moderna, pe de alta parte, pretinde sa legifereze
intreg domeniul, chiar si preocuparile inca inexistente la data pronuntarii. Ea se extinde, in nota ideologica, de
la un nucleu central pseudo-stiintific, pe cale rationala inductiva (in matematica, operatia poarta numele de
inductie incompleta) la intreg corpul de probleme existente sau posibile. Nu se mai codifica forma ci principii
generatoare ale acesteia, de vreme ce forma inca nu exista, cel putin nu in mod eficient ca model. Se inlocuieste
materia prima traditionala cu cea indusa ideologic, "verificata" pe cale rationala. Pasul in aceasta directie
exhaustiva l-au facut codificatorii stilurilor academiste de secol 19. Nevoia de o acoperire cat mai larga a decurs
din analogia cu metoda stiintifica si din constatarea pluralitatii optiunilor - posibilitatea alegerii dintre mai multe
stiluri, lucru cu desavarsire nou, in afara modului de dezvoltare traditional. Extinderea domeniului a alimentat
substantial golirea de sens manierista. Logica revolutionara a condus la urmatorul pas - codificarea
potentialitatii in locul experientei.
Grade de constrangere. In al doilea rand, acceptarea formei, la pre-moderni, este mai putin angajanta decat
acceptarea principiilor moderne din pricina participarii rationale, in cel de-al doilea caz, al aplicantului/arhitect
la traducerea in forma a principiilor. Teoria moderna de arhitectura a exploatat un teren neatins in epocile
anterioare prin extinderea teoretizarii asupra tuturor aspectelor, particulare, dar in special fundamentale ale
profesiei. Deplasarea accentului de pe "cum construim" pe "de ce construim cum construim" include in discutie
elemente anterior neinteresante din pricina slabei sau inexistentei legaturi cu forma. Aparitia ferestrei (arcului)
gotic a primit explicatii de naturi diferite, tectonice sau de sensibilitate artistica. Motivele sunt deduse din forma
si nu intalnim expunerea lor programatica, anterioara sau contemporana cu primele realizari. Aceste motive se
inrudesc, fata de cele moderne, prin gradul mic de abstractizare - interpretarea nu are de parcurs pasi riscanti, fie
prin multitudine, fie prin dimensiune. Pentru fereastra orizontala a lui Le Corbusier demersul hermeneutic se
cere a fi mult mai laborios. Influenta sistemului de credinte (ideologie) este mai semnificativa in acest caz decat
cea a betonului armat sau a sensibilitatii artistului. Fereastra orizontala este, cel putin partial, o negatie, o
infirmare a modelelor si a constrangerilor gravitationale. Explicatia include in mod legitim conceptia manifesta
si definita a arhitectului despre om, natura si constructie.
De-la-sine-intelesul este pierderea capitala, si in acelasi timp inconstienta, a modernitatii. Valoarea sa ca
purtator al experientei si mijloc eficient de conformare formala a fost in general ignorata pe parcursul unui
intreg secol. O recuperare a acestei realitati se incearca in ultimii ani, dar revenirea la starea dinnaintea
pacatului originar al "de ce"-ului este imposibila. Alternativa este construirea constienta a propriilor limite de
actiune, pe baza unei cunoasteri cuprinzatoare, dirijata si nuantata a problemelor ce asteapta raspuns. Teoria
moderna de arhitectura esueaza atat in privinta limitarii cat si in cea a soliditatii premiselor. Pe baze reduse si
marginale fenomenului arhitectural - idoli adoptati - se incheaga sisteme ideologice ce reflecta distorsionat
realitatile mediului, constituindu-se in premise riscante ale edificarii.
Regionalism si manierism. Codificarea pre-moderna nu a fost intrinsec regionalista; atunci cand au avut

posibilitatea (si imperialismul european le-a oferit-o) arhitectii si-au aplicat cunostiintele in cele mai indepartate
colturi ale lumii, fara vreo consideratie pentru obiceiul local. Lasand la o parte aceste cazuri, ce arata totusi
limitele acceptarii fara rezerve sau intelegere a modelelor, arhitectura pre-moderna s-a conformat in linii mari
exigentelor situationale (evident, fara a fi constienta de ele). Chiar in contextul inter-dependentei, in special la
nivel cultural, a statelor europene, principalele stiluri istorice au fost ajustate conform sensibilitatii locale.
Acelasi lucru se aplica si in privinta relatiilor temporale, tot pe calea de-la-sine-intelesului. Arhitectura moderna
este, dimpotriva, programatic internationalista si ne-definibila pe cale temporala, analog cu puritatea ratiunii ce
o legitimeaza. Zeitgeist-ul (spriritul timpului), ca idol popular in mediile arhitecturale, se prezinta, din acest
punct de vedere, ca o teorie generala legitima, menita insa a fi aplicata o singura data, si anume in cazul trecerii
revolutionare de la vechi la nou. Odata obiectivul indeplinit, adica forma reformata, spiritul timpului, abuziv
inteles si interpretat din start, a fost abandonat inghetarii manieriste.
Codificarea ideologica inlatura, in principiu, riscul manierist inerent oricarui canon. Principiile moderne au
avut insa o legatura slaba cu formalitatea, necesitand metodologie de aplicare - exemple gata construite. Pe
scara larga, la nivelul arhitecturii de consum, careia i se adreseaza cu precadere noua teorie, efectul a fost
diametral opus intentiilor initiale. S-au copiat formele. Acestea, definite in mare masura de continutul ideologic,
in stare de copie au accentuat problema manierista a golirii de inteles.
In prezent formele moderne si-au facut loc, pe calea obisnuintei si cu ajutorul nuantarii ulterioare, in domeniul
formelor pe care cetateanul contemporan le recunoaste, cu care se poate relationa. Timpul le-a metamorfozat,
prin prisma constiintei colective, in materia pe care au combatut-o cu inversunare - au devenit traditionale, si-au
impus definitiv vocabularul si s-au deschis in directia investirii cu noi sensuri prin modificari evolutive.
Elementele axiomatice - idolii prezentati - apartin perioadei moderne, adica, deja, istoriei. Soarta lor prezenta
difera de la caz la caz. Experienta a selectionat pe cei adecvati edificarii, ignorandu-se originile ideologice.
Acest fapt ar indica o caracteristica manierista a contemporaneitatii arhitecturale. Idolii neconformi sensibilitatii
actuale, sau care nu au corespuns niciodata, au fost inlaturati, sau inlocuiti cu anti-tezele lor. Tabula-rasa a lasat
locul situationismului si inter-textualismului, iar a-contextualitatea, contextualismului. Masina nu mai este
perceputa ca formatoare a societatii, dar exista preocupari pentru definirea unei "arhitecturi digitale", semn ca
tehnologia nu si-a pierdut toata fascinatia. Descompunerea si anti-gravitationalitatea au devenit mijloace
comune de formare arhitecturala, data fiind bogatia semantica pe care o genereaza atunci cand nu au caracter
exclusivist. Purismul geometric are un statut oscilant, fiind practicat de minimalisti si contestat de
postmodernisti. Deconstructivistii incripteaza in cheie ideologica mesajul vizual, dar metoda a devenit o raritate
in peisajul contemporan. Codificarea, de orice fel, a fost cvasi-abandonata in favoarea criticii si meta-teoriei.
Lumea actuala este multi-polara - spectrul larg de optiuni netezeste asperitatile dintre extreme. Idolii
arhitecturali ai inceputului de secol 21 nu mai sunt exclusivisti.
Interdisciplinaritatea. Interdisciplinaritatea poate fi inteleasa ca opusul autonomiei, in sensul ca interesul
manifestat pentru varii domenii ale cunoasterii reprezinta o recunoastere a dependentei arhitecturii de
concluziile acestora. Spatiul in care pot fi cautate cunostiintele ajutatoare este nelimitat, din moment ce toate
aceste cunostiinte privesc in vreun fel pe cel caruia ii este adresat obiectul arhitectural. In practica se prefera
disciplinele umaniste, in cazul carora legatura cu destinatarul demersului este mai evidenta.
Interdisciplinaritatea nu este reversul autonomizarii in privinta relatiilor cu celelalte arte. Desi arhitectii s-au
inspirat pe tot parcursul secolului 20 din productia de pictura si sculptura contemporane, totusi interesul
principal de studiu nu se indreapta in aceasta directie.
Cercetarea interdisciplinara este, la nivelul arhitecturii, o cautare a paradisului pierdut, a starii de dinainte de
pacatul originar al cunoasterii (analitice). Se incearca regasirea armoniei in ecuatia multiplu nedeterminata a
binoamelor om-societate si obiect arhitectural-oras. Edificiului teoretic ce se inalta in acest mod ii lipseste
viziunea unica, integratoare - cheie a reusitelor pre-moderne. Ridicarea diverselor parti ale acestuia a inceput
simultan, de catre echipe diferite, uneori adverse, fara conducerea unui sef de santier. Acesta din urma a fost
inlaturat ca necorespunzator imperativului de libertate a lucratorilor. Nu este clar daca variile parti ale
edificiului se vor intalni vreodata la varf. Promitator este ca proiectul este in linii mari cunoscut (chiar daca
superficial) si acceptat - el se prezinta sub forma armoniei pierdute.
Interdisciplinaritatea este incercarea de refacere a unitatii, este partea de sinteza ce a lipsit stiintei moderne. A
nu se confunda cautarea unitatii prin sinteza cu cea prin ideologie. Cea de-a doua reprezinta pericolul celei
dintai.

sfrunza@yahoo.com"
Aspecte ale raportului dintre filosofie si esoterism n intepretarea lui Moshe Idel
Abstract: This text deals with Moshe Idel's perspective on the connections between Maimonide's philosophy
and Abulafia's esoteric thought. Idel analyses their thinking under the aspect of their appearance, inter-relation,
and inner dynamics. Idel's analysis reveals that Maimonide's attempt to issue an esoteric book, one that would
give back to Judaism a lost esoteric science, gave a particular impulse to the development of Jewish mysticism,
and especially to the ecstatic Kabbalah. Maimonide attempted to transform philosophy into a mystic instrument
of understanding the secrets of the Torah. This fact determined Abulafia to re-signify the Maimonidean thought
and to integrate it into a limit experience of "unio mystica". In this context, several aspects concerning the
arcanization and the super-arcanization of philosophical and mystical texts are discussed.
Filosofia si arcanizarea ei
Vom ncerca sa urmarim un aspect important n ceea ce priveste relatiile dintre filosofie si gndirea esoterica, n
speta cea a cabalei, ntr-un moment care pare sa privilegieze o reconstructie semnificativa a acestui raport.
Pentru aceasta ne vom opri mpreuna cu Moshe Idel asupra unui moment decisiv n ntlnirea dintre filosofie si
misticism. Moshe Idel ne atrage atentia asupra unei ntlniri definitorii pentru acest raport cea dintre
Maimonide, fondatorul aristotelismului evreiesc, si exegetii sai. n secolul al treisprezecelea n Spania se
constata un efort special de redefinire a esotericului prin trecerea de la studiul filosofic al Ghidului ratacitilor, la
o suita larga si variata de interpretari care pun n lumina dezvoltarea diferitor forme de cabala. O parte a
cabalistilor spanioli au interpretat opera lui Maimonide ca pe o sursa filosofica ce trebuie privita ntr-o maniera
mai profunda, utiliznd modalitatile specifice de abordare oferite de cabala. Ei propun o lectura secreta a
Ghidului ratacitilor, pe care Maimonide nsusi o declara drept o opera esoterica1. Procesul de secretizare a unei
opere care este prin ea nsasi esoterica este numit de Moshe Idel supra-arcanizare, iar secretizarea unei opere n
general este numita arcanizare2.
Complexitatea raporturilor pe care filosofia le ntretine cu gndirea mistica, si n special cu cabala, este nfatisata
de Moshe Idel prin trei pozitii exemplare ale unor gnditori care ncearca sa explice emergenta misticii evreiesti
si sa lamureasca implicatiile pe care le au raporturile dezvoltate ntre Maimonide si cabala. O prima perspectiva
adusa n discutie este cea afirmata de Graetz, n viziunea caruia cabala este o doctrina cu origine straina, ce nu
are o baza preexistenta n traditia iudaica si care a aparut ca o reactie la gndirea rationalista a lui Maimonide si
a succesorilor sai3. O alta conceptie, mai aporpiata de cea asumata de Moshe Idel este cea a lui David Neumark,
care vede n cabala o gndire evreiasca autentica, ce nvinge ntr-o confruntare dialectica de lunga durata cu
filosofia. Nasterea misticismului evreiesc, cabala, apare astfel ca o reactie la ascensiunea filosofiei evreiesti asa
cum este ea expusa n Ghidul ratacitilor4. Cabalistii par sa iasa nvingatori din aceasta controversa, ceea ce duce
la un moment de declin al gndirii filosofice. Maimonide apare n aceasta interpretare ca filosoful ce marcheaza
sfrsitul perioadei clasice, n care domina gndirea filosofica. Ar fi vorba, asadar de o trecere de la gndirea
filosofica clasica la cabala clasica5. Evaluarile critice ale lui Moshe Idel conduc la concluzia ca o pozitie care
face abstractie de filosofia maimonidiana n procesul dezvoltarii cabalei este cea a lui Scholem. Scholem
considera ca trendul mistic al cabalei s-a nascut la interferenta dintre gnosticism, transmis n cercurile evreiesti
de-a lungul secolelor, si neoplatonismul filosofic asa cum apare el n versiuni medievale. Fara sa excluda un
posibil impact al controversei n jurul operelor lui Maimonide asupra dezvoltarii cabalei, Scholem considera ca
aceasta dezbatere are mai degraba o influenta secundara6.
Moshe Idel aduce doua corective celor trei tipuri de abordari mentionate. Pe de o parte, afirma ca nu putem face
abstractie de existenta unui material precabalistic n traditia iudaica si chiar n textele iudaice clasice. Acesta nu
era de natura gnostica, ci, dimpotriva, exista suficiente indicii ca ar fi putut chiar avea influente asupra
materialului simbolic vehiculat de gnosticism. Pe de alta parte, i se pare dincolo de orice ndoiala faptul ca
interpretarea filosofica rationalista si naturalista a temelor esoterismului iudaic este cea care declanseaza n mod
decisive critica virulenta ndreptata mpotriva lui Maimonide7.
Exegetii lui Maimonide, printre care si Moshe Halbertal, evidentiaza preocuparile pentru esoteric ale lui
Maimonide. Acesta avea la dispozitie doua tipuri de practica a cunoasterii ezoterice. O metoda de scriere
ezoterica, n care prin intermediul parabolelor si al cuvintelor echivoce snt transmise cunostinte si o tehnica
orala, de transmitere a titlurilor capitolelor Ghidului ratacitilor catre o persoana initiata. Halbertal constata ca

spre a fi n concordanta cu prevederile traditiei, care spun ca despre astfel de lucruri nu se poate vorbi n
prezenta a doua persoane, Maimonide si construieste cartea n forma tesaturii unor scrisori catre ucenicul sau,
conjurnd cititorul sa pastreze ascunse secretele Ghidului8.
Halbertal constata ca Maimonide refuza sa se situeze n continuitatea vreunei traditii n ceea ce priveste
transmiterea sensului ascuns. Spre deosebire de cabalisti, care circumscriu descrierea secretelor Torei ca parte a
unei traditii stravechi, spre a evita orice controverse si rivalitati, filosoful afirma ca traditia ezoterica a
fost uitata si ca el ncearca nu sa o redescopere, ci sa o recompuna. Maimonide afirma, totodata, ca o data cu
moartea sa aceasta stiinta esoterica este destinata sa devina, la rndul sau, parte a unei traditii ezoterice pierdute.
Totusi, Moshe Halbertal arata, cu gravitate dar si cu ironie, ca pentru a nu lasa sa moara aceasta traditie,
Maimonide ncalca restrictiile cu privire la pastrarea secretelor ascunse si le mpartaseste unui singur initiat.
Lumea sensului unic n care Maimonide recuprereaza si transmite sensurile ezoterice este descrisa de Halbertal
n felul urmator: tarmul ezotericului faciliteaza integrarea a doua lumi aparent contradictorii sensul revelat al
Scripturilor si contextul filosofic si stiintific n care se situeaza persoana ratacita. Aceasta contradictie este
solutionata prin cercetarea sistematica a nivelului profund al textului, care incorporeaza problematici filosofice
si stiintifice"9.
Aceasta pendulare ntre esoteric si stiintific, ntre arcanizarea traditiei iudaice si explicarea sa rationala
declanseaza critici acerbe la adresa modului de filosofare propus de Maimonide.
Cum se explica faptul ca filosofia lui Maimonide se afla n mijlocul unei att de puternice controverse, desi era
un halahist de mare eruditie, si un filosof cu o exprimare precisa?10 Raspunsul lui Moshe Idel releva noutatea
radicala pe care interpretarea aristotelica o dadea iudaismului. Nimeni din cercurile filosofice evreiesti ale
vremii nu parea capabil sa sustina conceptii de natura celor expuse de Maimonide. Reinterpretarea rationalista a
traditiei ebraice facuta de Maimonide i apare lui Moshe Idel ca o ruptura neta11 ce strneste o multitudine de
critici, iar "aceasta reactie a fost catalizatorul principal al cristalizarii cabalei initiale"12. Datorita rupturii pe
care o produce, conceptia maimonidiana este perceputa ca una revolutionara. O atitudine radicala a lui
Maimonide este socotita faptul ca filosoful medieval este primul care are curajul de a intra
ntr-o opozitie deschisa cu operele fundamentale ale vechiului misticism iudaic, justificnd ca traditia evreiasca
autentica a fost pierduta. El exprima convingerea ca, prin intermediul filosofiei lui Aristotel si a interpretarilor
medievale ale gndirii acestuia, ar fi descoperit semnificatia autentica a esoterismului ebraic. Avnd n vedere
extraordinara autoritate a lui Maimonide, reactiile nu au ntrziat sa apara. Pastratorii traditiei esoterice stravechi
au declansat atitudini dintre cele mai variate si au propus exegeze multiple ce au dus n cele din urma la
constituirea curentului medieval al cabalei13.
Analiznd modul de raportare al misticilor fata de filosofie, Idel ajunge la convingerea ca nu filosofia ca atare
este respinsa de cabalisti, ci doar ncercarea filosofilor de a substitui interpretarea esoterica cu una rationala de
tip aristotelic. Preocuparea lor esentiala era aceea de a afirma diferenta si chiar opozitia ntre exegeza de tip
filosofic si cea traditional evreiasca14. n cazul concret al raportarii la gndirea lui Maimonide era vorba n
primul rnd de o critica a "esoterismului maimonidian" de pe pozitiile esoterismului traditional.
Cabala promoveaza n acest context, o controversa ponderata" ntre aspectele rationalizatoare si mistice n
iudaism. Idel o numeste ponderata deoarece nu a fost promovata o critica destructiva deschisa, ci mai degraba a
avut loc o reconstructie teoretica ce reprezenta o alternativa bazata pe o traditie ndelung dezvoltata si
consacrata15.
Putem observa n aceasta dezbatere de idei un efort de arcanizare a traditiei iudaice prezent n opera lui
Maimonide. n acelasi timp, o parte semnificativa a traditiei mistice realizeaza n mod sistematic o
supraarcanizare a gndirii lui Maimonide, n special a filosofiei dezvoltata n cuprinsul Ghidului ratacitilor ce se
dorea nca de la nceput o carte esoterica. n felul acesta, filosofia devine un instrument mistic de cunoastere,
chiar n conditiile n care ea este practicata
n limbajul rationalist al aristotelismului arab si evreiesc. Totodata, gnditori de prima mna din contextul cabalei
dezvolta o doctrina mistica n limbajul aristotelic propus de Maimonide, transformnd mistica ntr-un mod de
filosofare si de cunoastere a lui Dumnezeu, pe baza continuitatii unei traditii stravechi, si dnd filosofiei propriul
ei drept la existenta de sine.
Maimonide si filosofia ca dimensiune esoterica
Prin sublinierea proceselor de arcanizare pe care le realizeaza cabalistii asupra Ghidului ratacitilor, Idel ncearca
sa evidentieze ca demarcatiile ntre filosofie si misticism snt tot att de neclare n iudaism, cum snt si n alte

religii. Exista multi cabalisti care considera cabala ca fiind filosofia interioara16. Asa cum pentru Maimonide
filosofia este menita sa pastreze ascunse secretele inaccesibile maselor si sa faca accesibil esotericul doar unei
elite. Este motivul pentru care Maimonide relateaza ca Ghidul ratacitilor este o carte ezoterica si ca ea se
adreseaza doar celor care au ajuns pe o anumita treapta de initiere n taina textelor sacre. Metoda de interpretare
alegorica pare sa fie n acest caz singura capabila sa ierarhizeze diferitele niveluri de ntelegere a textelor n
functie de cititorul caruia i se adreseaza.
Analiznd aceasta ierarhizare a transmiterii cunoasterii, Moshe Halbertal constata ca la Maimonide apare nu
numai distinctia ntre o elita si masele largi, ci si o diviziune n cadrul elitei, ntre elita traditionala ce
interpreteaza legea si Talmudul si elita ce are acces la nvatatura esoterica a Torei. n felul acesta, Maimonide
postuleaza existenta unei elite careia i este accesibil ezotericul. Ea are menirea de a facilita integrarea culturala
prin ncorporarea n explicatiile experientei religioase a unor conceptii filosofice, care nu reprezinta nimic
altceva dect dimensiunea esoterica a Torei. Aceasta stratificare a elitelor si a maselor si pune amprenta si
asupra teoriei cu privire la limbaj. Existenta unui dublu sens este corelata de Halbertal cu existenta unui dublu
limbaj care face posibila adresarea, prin intermediul acelorasi cuvinte, unor tipuri de public diferite. Cercetarea
conceptiei esoterice a lui Maimonide scoate la iveala faptul ca tocmai notiunea de esoterism, limitele si
argumentele sale si au sursa n acelasi cadru cultural caruia i atribuie Maimonide propria sa nvatatura
ezoterica. Mai precis, Maimonide considera doctrina ezoterica drept o unealta care transgreseaza traditia si
similitudinile aristotelice musulmane; mai mult dect att, ntreaga sa conceptie ezoterica si argumentarea
ncadrarii acesteia n traditia iudaica snt vazute n termeni de traditie filosofica", scrie Halbertal17.
Aceasta traditie este rationala pentru ca este mistica. Actul filosofarii este tot att de important ca si filosofia
nsasi deoarece discursul rational aplicat traditiei iudaice presupune o practica esoterica de decriptare, dar si de
ascundere a secretelor traditiei. Filosofia tine astfel de practica ce ne orienteaza n lumea secretului si a
secretizarii (arcanizarii).
Istoricii ideilor l plaseaza pe Maimonide n contextul cultural al filosofiei arabe unde exista un tip de reflectie
numita falsafah, iar adeptii ei erau numiti faylasufs. Ei credeau ca rationalismul aducea forma celei mai nalte
religii si propunea o notiune de Dumnezeu mai desavrsita dect cea a dumnezeului revelat n scripturi18.
Karen Armstrong situeaza convingerea maimonidiana ca religia iudaica este ntemeiata pe principii rationale
ferme sub influenta acestei filosofii, ndeosebi n forma oferita de Ibn Rushd sau Averroes19. Analizele lui
Maurice-Ruben Hayoun20 se concentreaza si ele pe aceasta tendinta a lui Maimonide de a reformula n termeni
filosofici natura revelatiei iudaice, prelund n mod critic filosofia lui Aristotel cu intentia de a pune n echilibru
datul traditional si revelat cu datul filosofic si revelat. ntregul efort maimonidian are la baza convingerea ca
aristotelismul reprezinta forma desavrsita a gndirii. Pornind de aici, gnditorul evreu depune eforturi sustinute
de a ajunge la o convergenta ntre comentariul alegoric si interpretarea filosofica a traditiilor evreiesti. Nu
ntmplator Maurice-Ruben Hayoun afirma ca Maimonide are o idee filosofica despre Dumnezeu si i sacrifica
multe pasaje biblice ce nu se potriveau cu ea",21 n ciuda afirmatiei ca filosofia nu poate sa ajunga la date
contrare revelatiei deoarece filosofia si religia au o finalitate comuna. Acest raport strns ntre filosofie si religie
i pune pe exegeti n dificultate atunci cnd ncearca sa distinga n mod clar n gndirea lui Maimonide
fundamentele filozofice de cele teologice: el a mbinat foarte strns datul rational cu cel traditional sau revelat
Hotart sa faca din iudaism o religie luminata, Maimonide a sapat adnc la temelia ambelor categorii, ale
revelatiei si ratiunii, spre a ajunge sa demonstreze ca ele se confunda, constituind pna la urma o entitate"22.
Exegetii scrierilor maimonidiene, si n special cei ai Ghidului ratacitilor, releva credinta lui Maimonide, pe de o
parte, ca filosofia reprezinta o parte ezoterica a credintei iudaice si ea trebuie dezvaluita doar unei elite
filosofice. Pe de alta parte, interpretarea alegorica a scripturilor trebuia promovata pentru oamenii de rnd, spre
a-i ajuta sa nu cada n antropomorfism atunci cnd se raporteaza la Dumnezeu si chiar pentru a avea accesul la
nemurire. Maimonide este cel care, pentru prima oara n gndirea iudaica, ajunge sa fixeze un set de reguli, un
cod de 13 articole de credinta care sa asigure acel minim de cunoastere" la care trebuie sa ajunga orice adept al
iudaismului. Aceasta marturisire de credinta" expusa n Comentariu la Misna ar cuprinde: "1) existenta lui
Dumnezeu, 2) Unitatea lui Dumnezeu; 3) Noncorporalitatea lui Dumnezeu; 4) Eternitatea lui Dumnezeu; 5)
Interdictia de a sluji altor Dumnezei; 6) Existenta profetiei; 7) Moise a fost cel mai mare dintre profeti; 8)
originea divina a Torei, 9) Validitatea eterna a Torei; 10) Dumnezeu cunoaste faptele oamenilor; 11) El i judeca
pe oameni potrivit acestora; 12) Dumnezeu va trimite un Mesia; 13) nvierea mortilor". Stabilirea unui
asemenea set de credinte corecte" duce la un dogmatism care nu a existat niciodata n traditia anterioara lui

Maimonide. Este si motivul pentru care, n ciuda autoritatii exercitata de gndirea sa n secolele urmatoare, nu a
reusit sa se impuna ca atare nici n epoca si nici mai trziu. Acest dogmatism religios este perceput ca ceva cu
totul strain, inexplicabil si incompatibil cu traditia hermeneutica a iudaismului. Julius Guttmann pune acest
dogmatism pe seama intelectualismului filosofic practicat de Maimonide23.
Intelectualismului filosofic practicat n Ghidul ratacitilor viza depasirea credintei religioase naive si
mbratisarea unor convingeri religioase rationale, care sa antreneze metodele riguroase ale logicii si ale
discursului de tip stiintific. De aceea, Zev Harvey subliniaza faptul ca nu e deloc ntmplator ca Ghidul
ratacitilor se constituie ca o adresare a lui Maimonide catre un student care ramne perplex n fata constatarii
existentei unui conflict ntre iudaism si stiinta sau filosofie. Deoarece acest context oferea lui Maimonide un
bun prilej sa desfasoare o larga argumentatie n sprijinul ideii ca prin ntelegerea solidaritatii reciproce dintre
legea divina si cercetarea rationala poti sa rami fidel deopotriva bibliei si traditiei iudaice, pe de o parte, si
stiintei si filosofiei, pe de alta parte24.
Reflectiile lui Maimonide au strnit o mare varietate de interpretari.
Urmnd structura argumentativa a filosofului medieval, Maurice-Ruben Hayoun constata ca trairea dumnezeului
personal a lui Avraam se sterge progresiv
n favoarea conceptului de divinitate, a dumnezeului filosofilor. Aceasta nu implica nsa vreo diminuare a
credintei sau religiozitatii, deoarece potrivit lui Maimonide putem iubi doar ceea ce cunoastem, iar cunoasterea
presupune sa studiem Fizica si Metafizica lui Aristotel25.
Dintr-un unghi diferit este abordat Maimonide de Moshe Halbertal, care subliniaza importanta si rolul
dimensiunii esoterice. Halbertal arata dublul rol al ezoterismului n corelatie cu viata sociala si politica. Pe de o
parte, dndu-i filosofului posibilitatea de a-si formula opiniile ntr-un limbaj dual accesibil doar celor initiati26,
ezoterismul l protejeaza pe filosof si filosofia sa de batjocura multimilor care nu l pot ntelege apara
filosoful de mna de fier a autoritatii religioase, care l considera distructiv si periculos". Pe de alta parte,
ezoterismul protejeaza pe cei din multime ntr-un proces de tainuire deoarece expunerea la filosofie a vulgului
sau a oricaror persoane neinitiate n procesul stiintific educational i va conduce pe acestia catre pierderea
credintei, din moment ce vor fi incapabili sa nteleaga adevarul si, prin urmare, l vor distorsiona"27.
Esoterismul apare astfel ca o bariera n calea demistificarii"28.
O pozitie ce priveste fenomenul n ntreaga sa complexitate este cea adoptata de Moshe Idel. Desi vorbeste
despre Maimonide ca despre creatorul aristotelismului evreiesc, Moshe Idel considera ca filosoful scrie ntr-o
maniera criptica, ntr-un stil platonician, asupra unor subiecte aristotelice, pe care le proiecteaza n categoriile
rabinice ale gndirii esoterice"29.
Interesul lui Moshe Idel este ndreptat spre un Maimonide care ofera un cadru pentru dezvoltarea unei filosofii a
naturii si a unei metafizici neoaristotelice, marcata de cteva influente neoplatonice, care servesc ca un punct de
plecare pentru o intensificare a vietii religioase ce duce n cele din urma la o experienta mistica30.
Critica gndirii maimonidiene si recuperarea esotericului n gndirea cabalei
Afirmatiile privind moartea traditiei esoterice si utilizarea filosofiei ca instrument esoteric de catre Maimonide
nu putea sa nu ntmpine critici dintre cele mai nuantate. Atentia lui Idel se ndreapta spre o critica deschisa cum
este cea a lui Nahmanide, care evidentiaza existenta unei traditii transmisa "gura catre gura", accesibila doar
celor mai piosi dintre evrei. Se constata astfel existenta unor secrete ce nu pot fi deduse nici din textul biblic si
nici nu pot fi identificate cu motive din opera lui Aristotel sau supuse interpretarii filosofice, care are pentru
cabalisti "aparenta artei magice si a vrajitoriei"31. Pe acest fond, Moshe Idel constata o dezvoltare a traditiei
esoterice determinata de reactia pe care o au cabalistii fata de ncercarea de a inventa o alternativa la esoterismul
antic. Ei erau convinsi ca orice legitimare poate fi conferita doar de interpretarea traditionala. Prin urmare,
"divulgarea traditiei autentice" reprezenta n opinia lor cel mai bun antidot la eroarea intelectuala a lui
Maimonide"32.
Desi n centrul controversei dintre perspectiva maimonidiana si cea a cabalistilor stau temele esoterice legate de
"relatarea Carului sau relatarea Genezei", divergentele perspectivale au o paleta foarte larga. Una dintre
dezbaterile careia Moshe Idel i acorda o importanta deosebita este cea n jurul comandamentelor. Moshe Idel
arata ca n viziunea cabalistilor comandamentele trebuie integrate unei viziuni holistice, n care acestea snt
corelative sefirotilor. Astfel, orice punere n discutie a structurii teosofice atrage dupa sine diminuarea
semnificatiei profunde a comandamentelor. Acestia ofera o interpretare teurgica n care nu numai ca se afirma o
corespondenta ntre lumea sefirotilor si cele 613 comandamente, ci se vorbeste si de o practica teurgica n care

comandamentele snt concepute ca instrumente ale puterii pe care cabalistii o au n a influenta dinamica divina.
Moshe Idel ne aminteste faptul ca ideea centrala n hermeneutica teurgica este ca activitatea umana poate sa
produca schimbari n domeniul divinului, al supranaturalului. Pe o asemenea convingere se dezvolta o ntreaga
literatura de interpretare esoterica a comandamentelor divine. Moshe Idel acorda o importanta sporita n
emergenta si dezvoltarea acestor doctrine raportului mai mult sau mai putin critic sau explicit pe care acesti
cabalisti l ntretin cu interpretarea rationala a lui Maimonide, pe care o considera ca provenind din surse straine
de gndirea iudaica.
Evalund aceasta polemica, Moshe Idel arata ca "aparitia istorica a textelor cabalistice n Provence si n Spania
este partial un raspuns dat de teologii evrei, aflati n posesia mai vechilor traditii esoterice, la afirmatia lui
Maimonide conform careia esoterismul evreiesc este constituit din adevaruri rationale... Operele sistematice ale
lui Maimonide, care presupun ca traditiile esoterice evreiesti au fost pierdute si ca el le-a redescoperit, i-au
obligat pe cabalisti sa cristalizeze elementele traditiilor esoterice pe care le cunosteau si sa le reformuleze ntrun sistem mai coerent. Acest sistem, care este n general o interpretare teosofico-teurgica a surselor evreiesti
clasice, nu a acceptat niciodata teologia lui Maimonide, sau conceptia sa asupra comandamentelor"33.
nsa, chiar printre cabalisti, si cu att mai mult n curente diferite ale cabalei, ntlnim o multitudine de atitudini
si interpretari. Adept al nuantelor, Moshe Idel arata ca, n timp ce cabala teozofica si teurgica tradeaza un tip de
mentalitate religioasa profund diferita de cea a lui Maimonide, cabala extatica prezinta o strucutra intelectuala si
o relatie diferita n raport cu gndirea "marelui vultur". Ca atitudine exemplara n aceasta orientare, Moshe Idel
ne ofera atitudinea lui Abraham Abulafia, pentru care studiul textelor cabalei reprezenta o etapa de trecere
dinspre gndirea filosofica nspre experienta mistica. Cabala limbajului si Ghidul ratacitilor al lui Maimonide
snt temelia pe care Abulafia va construi edificiul cabalei extatice. Potrivit lui Moshe Idel, Abulafia se afla n
fata a doua maniere de studiu al Ghidului: una care ia n calcul existenta unei dimensiuni cabalistice n opera lui
Maimonide; si o alta, specifica succesorilor filosofului, care i atribuie propriile lor conceptii, dnd astfel o
proasta ntelegere a filosofiei maestrului. Abulafia a optat pentru cea dinti metoda si a construit o interpretare a
Ghidului prin prisma elementelor care fac din acesta o opera cabalistica. O afinitate cu aceasta metoda de
interpretare observa Moshe Idel n cazul lui Gikatilla, ucenicul lui Abulafia, care releva o dubla posibilitate de
valorizare a Ghidului ratacitilor: n perspectiva unei interpretari metaforice valide a Bibliei sau a unei perceptii
de tip cabalistic mai elaborate. Pentru Moshe Idel, acceptarea existentei a doua cai de interpretare a Ghidului
ratacitilor poate fi corelata cu cele doua atitudini divergente: cea a cabalei teosofico-teurgice care considera ca
avem de a face cu o opera suspecta care are implicatii periculoase; si cea a lui Abulafia care credea ca o
descifrare tot mai adecvata a exegezei maimonidiene a textului biblic conduce la ntelegerea sensului spiritual al
Ghidului ratacitilor, care releva caracterul sau cabalistic. n acest fel, textul maimonidian este vazut ca un
intermediar care "permite spiritului uman sa treaca de la perceptia simplista a unui text la o experienta
spirituala"34. n cazul lui Abulafia, Moshe Idel propune "o conceptie care vede n Ghid o etapa necesara pentru
elevarea sufletului uman de la un tip "simplist" de religie, bazata pe o ntelegere simpla a textului biblic, pna la
o religie "filosofica", ce alegorizeaza aspectele nefilosofice ale religiei si n cele din urma la o religie mistica
eliberatoare, ce vizeaza un "misionarism" extatic si uneori chiar experiente de unio mystica"35.
n cazul de fata termenul "mistica" este corelat de autor cu un efort uman ce vizeaza realizarea unei experiente
spirituale. n analizele lui Moshe Idel la textele lui Abulafia ne retin atentia cele doua "chei ale inteligentei": una
propusa de Maimonide prin exegeza alegorica, si o alta care vizeaza gnoza numelui divin nteles ca o
chintesenta a ntregii substante lingvistice. Ele necesita o metoda toraica specifica de interpretare. O asemenea
metoda presupune combinarea literelor si a secretelor lor si poate duce la atingerea nivelului iluminarii prin
intermediul Intelectului agent. Astfel, metoda toraica lingvistica este si o tehnica mistica ce implica experienta
unei relatii speciale ntre subiectul experientei si entitatile superioare. Idel constata ca, urmnd o asemenea
metoda, Abulafia se considera a fi comentatorul perfect al lui Maimonide deoarece reusise sa mbine mostenirea
esoterica a textelor acestuia cu experimentarea revelationala a interpretarii lor36.
Din analizele lui Moshe Idel putem constata ca n formularea doctrinei sale privind "unio mystica", Abulafia
foloseste o terminologie maimonidiana: "fuziunea totala dintre intelectul uman si cel divin este exprimata prin
intermediul principiului aristotelic conform caruia, n momentul procesului cognitiv, cunoscatorul se identifica
n totalitate cu ceea ce este cunoscut" 37.
Raportarea pozitiva a lui Abulafia fata de Maimonide este perceputa ca fiind o contributie importanta la
cultivarea unei atitudini pozitive fata de opera acestuia n rndurile reprezentantilor cabalei extatice. nsa, Moshe

Idel afirma ca desi terminologia celui mai important cabalist al acestei scoli este una maimonidiana, totusi,
influenta lui Maimonide si pierde treptat impactul asupra acestui curent al cabalei. Idel fixeaza rolul lui
Maimonide sub doua unghiuri de incidenta diferite. Maimonide apare n cazul cabalei teosofico-teurgice doar ca
un reper n raport cu care traditia esoterica se structureaza, printr-o situare alternativa n fata unui mod strain de
gndire. n cazul cabalei extatice impactul gndirii maimonidiene este unul de profunzime; snt afectate aici att
limbajul ct si semnificatiile de profunzime ale viziunilor formulate de aceasta scoala de gndire.
Ca o atitudine generala, nsa, Moshe Idel constata ca n cazul gnditorilor mistici care si ncep activitatea
intelectuala sub influenta lui Maimonide, putem sesiza o tendinta treptata de a se ndreapta spre speculatia
teosofica sau neoplatonica, cultivnd o atitudine critica deschisa fata de aristotelismul maimonidian.
Cele doua atitudini diferite fata de Maimonide snt pentru Moshe Idel rezultatul afirmarii a doua tipuri diferite
de metafizica: gndirea teosofica era preocupata de natura celor 10 sefiroti, situati dincolo de cele 10 intelecte
separate care jucau un rol central n metafizica maimonidiana; gndirea teosofica respinge metafizica lui
Maimonide considernd ca filosofia aristotelica vizeaza un domeniu care este inferior lumii sefirotice.
Raporturile ambigue ce se instituie ntre diverse scoli de gndire medievala, si n special ntre filosofie si
gndirea religioasa, snt ilustrate de Idel cu gndirea lui Abulafia. El este un adept al gndirii extatice care se
simte foarte apropiat de Maimonide, desi prin resemnificarile spirituale, mistice, ale schemei aristotelice se
ndeparteza de metafizica acestuia. Locul pe care l ocupa filosofia putea fi revelat de faptul ca aristotelismul
medieval maimonidian era n primul rnd un sistem descriptiv, care propunea "lucrarile lui Aristotel ca fiind
textele principale ale unui curriculum ideal, al carui scop este o percepere indirecta a atributelor lui Dumnezeu
prin intermediul contemplarii naturii."38 Modul n care cabalistii utilizau filosofia pentru a recupera esoterismul
ca dat al traditiei este evidentiat de doctrina lui Abulafia, care era prescriptiva si aducea "tehnici elaborate ce
permit obtinerea experientelor mistice nca n aceasta viata, experiente care, desi snt clar non-maimonidiene,
pot fi ntelese n termeni maimonidieni" 39.
Arcanizare si experienta profetica la Abraham Abulafia
Desi Maimonide utilizeaza esoterismul n opera sa, Idel considera adecvata afirmat ia lui Schlomo Pines potrivit
careia Maimonide nu este un mistic. Sugestive n acest sens snt analizele lui Moshe Idel care pun n evidenta
cteva din elementele care disting abordarea lui Abulafia de cea a lui Maimonide: 1) accentul pus pe salvarea
iminenta; 2) conceptul unei filosofii unitive; 3) rolul limbajului si al problemelor lingvistice.40 n ciuda faptului
ca se considera cel mai maimonidian dintre maimonidieni, Abulafia se ndeparteaza de viziunea lui Maimonide
prin exacerbarea acestor elemente.
1) Idel trateaza opera celor doi gnditori n doua perspective diferite. Maimonide desfasoara o opera
arheologica; Abulafia propune o deschidere eshatologica. Moshe Idel priveste Ghidul ratacitilor ca pe o opera
orientata spre trecut, o opera arheologica ce aduce la suprafata secretele pierdute. n sustinerea interpretarilor
sale, Idel angajeaza afirmatiile lui Maimonide potrivit carora esoterismul, asa cum este el descris n opera sa,
este rezultat al propriei sale reconstructii; ca o astfel de restaurare era reclamata de faptul ca n conditiile
exilului secretele au fost pierdute. Idel constata ca filosoful medieval nu ne spune care este metoda
redescoperirii acestora, daca se bazeaza pe o lectura atenta a textelor biblice sau a fost desprinsa din textele
rabinice ce tratau si subiecte esoterice. Maimonide afirma pur si simplu ca doar el poate sa refaca linia pierduta
a transmiterii secretelor Torei. Demersul lui Maimonide "este unul exegetic, care are repercusiuni importante
pentru atitudinea contemporanilor sai fata de Iudaism, care pot gasi o perspectiva interesanta, n special pentru
intelighentia evreiasca ce a fost expusa la forme non-iudaice de teologie si filosofie."41
Spre deosebire de interpretarile date de filosof, pentru Moshe Idel interpretarile secretelor Torei propuse de
Abraham Abulafia au loc ntr-o stare speciala de constiinta, sub presiunea iminentei mntuiri. n procesul acestei
mntuiri, care este deopotriva personala si nationala, Abulafia nsusi pare ca propriul sau Mesia si ca Mesia
comunitatii. Descifrarea secretelor Torei ofera o experienta mntuitoare42.
2) O deosebire esentiala pe care Idel o descopera nu numai ntre Maimonide si Abulafia, ci si ntre gndirea
filosofica si gndirea mistica n general apare n ceea ce priveste modul de a percepe fenomenul unio mystica.
Moshe Idel observa ca n timp ce gndirea maimonidiana limita stiinta umana la domeniul mundan si prin
aceasta ajungea la concluzia ca fiinta umana nu poate cunoaste natura lui Dumnezeu, Abulafia vorbeste despre
posibilitatea transformarii intelectului uman n Intelect Agent n timpul experientei mistice43. Aceasta viziune
este formulata de Abulafia chiar n comentariile sale asupra Ghidului ratacitilor.
Exegetii lui Maimonide au atras atentia ca accentuarea teologiei negative trimite la un soi de mistica aflata

dincolo de rationalismul filosofic. Karen Armstrong a sesizat chiar faptul ca pentru Maimonide profetia este
superioara filosofiei deoarece profetul are o cunoastere n care conlucreaza perfect elementul rational si cel
imaginativ.44
Snt sugestive n acest sens analizele lui Dan Cohn-Sherbok care aduce n discutie o tipologie umana propusa de
Maimonide, care mparte oamenii n trei clase: 1) nteleptii si filosofii, care au foarte dezvoltate capacitatile
rationale, nsa au o imaginatie insuficient dezvoltata; 2) oamenii de stat, politicienii, care au o imaginatie foarte
dezvoltata dar au un intelect deficient; 3) profetii, al caror intelect este bine dezvoltat si care au o imaginatie
perfecta45.
Acest statut aparte al profetului si al profetiei a fost bine surprins de Alan F. Segal46 atunci cnd releva faptul ca
desi Tora a fost data ca un dar special poporului evreu, ca un dar special al profetiei perfecte, n perspectiva
maimonidiana toti cei care studiaza si practica prevederile legii se pregatesc sa devina profeti: participam la
profetie n masura n care ne perfectionam potentialitatile"47 . Acest lucru se are n vedere atunci cnd se afirma
ca profetia este o sinteza a facultatilor intelectuale si imaginative, iar ngerul profetiei este identificat cu
Intelectul agent. Astfel, Segal constata ca Maimonide ajunge la o regndire originala a iudaismului printr-o
ntelegere rationala (diferita de cea prezenta n islam sau n crestinism unde ratiunea si credinta snt ierarhizate
si trebuie sa cedeze, n formule diverse, una n fata celeilalte) n care ratiunea si revelatia snt procese identice
si ambele snt acelasi lucru cu puterea prin care Dumnezeu creeaza si mentine universul"48.
Moshe Idel arata termenii n care la Maimonide si la Abulafia apare psihologia profetiei: profetia presupune
coborrea unui influx, cert de natura intelectuala, nti asupra intelectului uman si apoi asupra capacitatilor
imaginative. .. Abulafia confera intelectului controlul activitatii imaginative."49
Lucrurile devin mai clare daca ne amintim analizele lui Maurice-Ruben Hayoun care arata ca pentru Maimonide
Dumnezeu este n acelasi timp intelect, inteligenta si inteligibil; este fiinta cu existenta necesara, cauza prima,
forma universului si intelectul prim50. Analiznd teoria maimonidiana a intelectului, Maurice-Ruben Hayoun
arata ca trebuie sa vorbim de 1) intelectul hylic, ce da omului masura sa de fiinta rationala capabila sa vegheze
la perfectiunea corpului datorita aspectului sau practic si la perfectiunea sufletului datorita aspectului sau
teoretic; 2) intelectul n act care aduce procesul tripartit al abstractiei, conceptualizarii si ntelegerii spre o
ntelegere unica prin care nsusi intelectul hylic este actualizat, 3) intelectul agent, conceput ca agent al lumii
sublunare, el face ca intelectul hylic sa treaca de la potenta la act; 4) intelectul dobndit cel la care omul ajunge
atunci cnd realizeaza deplina sa maturitate si se poate contempla pe sine. Acest intelect este privit ca fiind
legatura unica si autentica ntre om si Dumnezeu. Intelectul activ accentueaza elementul de universalitate, cel
dobndit aspectul individualitatii, ele se afla nsa ntr-o nazuinta comuna, modelata moral si conexata cu
mplinirea Legii. Astfel ar trebui sa ntelegem cu Maimonide ca legatura dintre om si Dumnezeu poate fi ntarita
doar printr-o constanta preocupare n vederea apropierii si a iubirii lui Dumnezeu51.
Idel arata ca terminologia aristotelica este extrem de importanta deoarece ea a furnizat conceptele pentru ceea ce
era numit "unire intelectuala" cu Dumnezeu. Din epistemologia aristotelica, potrivit careia intelectul si
inteligibilul formeaza o unitate n actul cognitiv, se dezvolta mai apoi concluzia logica ce presupune ca "actul
intelectiv n care Dumnezeu este obiectul intelectului uman corespunde cu ceea ce e cunoscut ca unire
mistica"52. Aceasta atragea dupa sine o asimilare a limbajului filosofic aristotelic n vederea constituirii
terminologiei mistice.
n ciuda limbajului aristotelic, comun cabalistilor si filosofilor, Moshe Idel arata ca Maimonide, desi accepta ca
imitatio dei poate fi obtinuta n viata terestra, n domeniul practicii umane, respinge posibilitatea de a se realiza
o unire a omului cu divinitatea att timp ct fiinta umana este nca n aceasta existenta53. O pozitie asemanatoare
este sustinuta si de Gershom Scholem atunci cnd demonstreaza ca n unirea cu Dumnezeu se pastreaza
diferenta ontologica. Spre deosebire de Scholem care considera ca n experienta mistica se pastreaza o
permanenta distanta ntre om si Dumnezeu, Moshe Idel aduce dovezi textuale ale cabalistilor care arata ca
pentru mistici exista o "unio mystica suprema" n care nu se mai poate face distinctie ntre cele doua entitati ce
se unesc54.
Astfel, autorul nostru constata ca n timp ce Maimonide subliniaza n mod accentuat distinctia dintre intelectia
umana si cea divina, conceptia abulafiana promoveaza un panteism intelectual. Moshe Idel explica situatia
paradoxala n care Abulafia afirma apropierea sa de gndirea lui Maimonide prin faptul ca acesta o interpreteaza
printr-o grila raportata la propriile sale experiente spirituale. Pe aceasta baza se consolideaza convingerea lui
Abulafia ca opera lui Maimonide nu este doar o etapa intermediara ntre spiritualitatea biblica si experientele

sale spirituale, ci, n acelasi timp, o opera ce recupereaza cele 36 secrete pierdute pe care misticul le poate
dezvalui prin interpretare.
Pentru a explica tipul de experienta pe care Abulafia o propune ca unire mistica, Moshe Idel apeleaza la
termenul devekut care n cabala extatica desemneaza unirea individualului cu divinul. Acest termen este folosit
pentru a arata ca exista experiente n care se sustine ca sufletul este unit cu sufletul universal; ca sufletul sufera
o transformare care e descrisa de mistici si de filosofi ca o conversie a individualului ntr-o entitate
universala55. Astfel, ni se relateaza ca unirea cu totalitatea este descrisa de Abulafia n termeni maimonidieni ca
o unire ntre o entitate individuala care este intelectul agent cu o entitate universala numita ntr-un limbaj
ambiguu tot intelectul agent. Aceasta ambiguitate este socotita de Idel ca fiind un rezultat al dublei naturi a
intelectului activ. Idel considera ca la Abulafia conceptul de universalizare este legat mai degraba de intelect
dect de suflet. n acest sens se constata n rndul realitatilor create trei tipuri de fiinte: 1) intelectul care este
fragmentar dar n acelasi timp si universal si indivizibil; 2) sufletul care desi este indivizibil, este totdeauna
partial si niciodata universal; 3) trupul care este si fragmentar si divizibil. Ceea ce ne apare aici ca deosebit de
important este faptul ca n acest raport de individualizare si universalizare, organul mistic fundamental este
intelectul.56
3) Idel constata ca supraevaluarea intelectului este nsotita si de o supraevaluare a limbajului. Limbajul si
intelectul se ntlnesc la Abulafia ntr-o tehnica mistica menita sa duca la o intensificare a vietii spirituale, la
experiente extatice care induc stari profetice. Asa cum am mai amintit, aceste stari profetice snt indicatori ai
unui status Mesianic57.
Dorind sa adnceasca distinctia dintre modul filosofic si cel mistic de abordare, Moshe Idel arata ca pentru
Maimonide limbajul joaca un rol important n comunicare, dar nu are nici un rol n domeniul contemplatiei sau
n cel al intelectului. La Abulafia, nsa, limbajul este parte a tehnicilor mistice, care vizeaza experienta si
interpretarea58.
De altfel, Moshe Idel arata ca uneori Abulafia ntrebuinteaza tehnicile nu pentru a atinge o stare de uniune
mistica cu divinul, ci pentru a primi revelatii care au fost descrise drept conversatii dintre puterile mistice si cele
angelice care reprezinta imagini metaforice pentru Intellectus Agens, un intelect de natura spirituala desprins de
materie si care joaca un rol important n gnoseologia filosofica iudaica precum si n anumite traditii mistice din
Evul Mediu"59.
Moshe Idel ne da imaginea radicala a utilizarii mistice a limbajului, aratndu-se ca Abulafia merge pna acolo
nct ajunge sa conceapa Ghidul ratacitilor ca pe o combinatie de litere din care prin tehnici hermeneutice, si cu
sprijinul traditiei care transmite cele 36 de titluri ascunse ale capitolelor Ghidului, se poate ajunge la dezvaluirea
tuturor secretelor Torei60.
ntregul efort depus de Abulafia trebuie privit ca o modalitate de resemnificare a traditiei prin arcanizarea unui
text filosofic, care la rndul sau era preocupat de secretizarea si n acelasi timp de demistificarea traditiei
iudaice. O maniera de a explica cum se dezvolta acest raport este data de Moshe Idel atunci cnd pune n
evidenta dezvoltarile n plan exegetic aduse de confruntarile dintre codul alegoric adoptat de filosofi si codul
simbolic impus de catre cabalisti61.
O alta maniera explicativa presupune parasirea alegoriei filosofice obisnuite si instrumentarea unei conceptii n
care numai nlauntrul limbajului este posibil sa se gaseasca solutii ale sensului"62. Totodata, cabalistii par sa fi
gasit solutia pentru trecerea la eliminarea tuturor confruntarilor n planul exegetic afirmnd ca trebuie sa se
priceapa ca toate interpretarile duc spre acelasi principiu esential: dobndirea unei experiente mistice"63.
n acelasi timp, nu trebuie sa scapam din vedere importanta pe care o acorda Moshe Idel confruntarii dintre
filosofie si scripturi n cultura europeana, fapt ce poate fi regasit sub forma unei constiinte a unei tensiuni
creatoare64 si n gndirea iudaica. Filosofia evreiasca se naste tocmai la punctul de convergenta, confruntare si
interpelare reciproca a traditiei religioase si a creatiei filosofice.
Note:
1 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, n Revue de Metaphysique et de Morale, No
4/1998, p. 498.
2 Moshe Idel, Radical Hermeneutics: From Ancient to Medieval, and Modern Hermeneutics, n Atti dei
convegni lincei, Convegno Internazionale sul tema: Ermeneutica e critica, Academia Nationale dei Lincei,
Roma, 1998, pp. 165 si urm.
3 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, traducere de Mihaela Frunza, Ed. Dacia, Cluj-Napoca, 2001, p.

8.
4 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, loc. cit., p. 495.
5 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., pp. 8-9.
6 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, loc. cit., p. 496.
7 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., p. 10.
8 Moshe Halbertal, Ezoterism si exoterism. Restrictiile misterului n traditia iudaica, traducere de Roxana
Havrici, Ed. Limes, Cluj-Napoca, 2004, p. 85.
9 Moshe Halbertal, Ezoterism si exoterism. Restrictiile misterului n traditia iudaica, ed. cit., p. 85-86.
"Maimonide introduce conceptia conform careia ezoterismul e un mijloc de a integra filosofia n traditie" (p.
87).
10 Moshe Idel, Cabala. Noi perspective, Ed. Nemira, Bucuresti, 2000, p. 336.
11 Moshe Idel, Cabala. Noi perspective, ed. cit., p. 338.
12 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., p. 13.
13 Ibidem. 14 Ibidem.
15 Moshe Idel, Cabala. Noi perspective, ed. cit., p. 339.
16 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, loc. cit., p. 497.
17 Moshe Halbertal, Ezoterism si exoterism. Restrictiile misterului n traditia iudaica, ed. cit., p. 69.
18 Karen Armstrong, A History of God. From Abraham to Present: the 4000-year Quest for God, Mandarin,
London, 1996, p. 198.
19 Idem, p. 226.
20 Maurice-Ruben Hayoun, O istorie intelectuala a iudaismului, Ed. Hasefer, Bucuresti, 1998, pp.7-8.
21 Idem, p. 108.
22 Idem, p. 118.
23 Julius Guttmann, Philosophies of Judaism. The History of jewish Philosophy from Biblical Times to Franz
Rosensweig, The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia, 1964 (5724), pp. 178-179.
24 Warren Zev Harvey, Maimonide (Moise), n Enciclopedia Universalis, tome 11, pp. 525-526.
25 Maurice-Ruben Hayoun, Maimonide, PUF, Paris, 1987, p. 35.
26 Moshe Halbertal, Ezoterism si exoterism. Restrictiile misterului n traditia iudaica, ed. cit., p. 72:
"Ezoterismul faciliteaza diviziunea muncii, conditie esentiala a activitatii filosofului. Democratizarea cunoasteri
sau universalizarea spiritului filosofic ar conduce la distrugerea lumii; astfel, pentru a asigura continuitatea
existentei filosofului si a filosofiei, acest spirit trebuie sa fie accesibil doar ezotericilor".
27 Moshe Halbertal, Ezoterism si exoterism. Restrictiile misterului n traditia iudaica, ed. cit., pp. 69-70.
28 Idem, p. 77.
29 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., p. 112.
30 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, loc. cit., p. 501.
31 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., p. 16.
32 Idem, p. 21.
33 Idem, p. 31.
34 Idem, p. 50.
35 Idem, p. 51.
36 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., p. 54. Asupra influentei lui Maimonide asupra lui
Abulafia vezi si Moshe Idel, Mesianism si mistica, Ed. Hasefer, Bucuresti, 1996, pp. 20 si urm.
37 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., p. 64.
38 Idem, p. 70.
39 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., p. 70.
40 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, loc. cit., p. 499.
41 Idem, p. 499.
42 Idem, p. 500.
43 Idem, p. 518.
44 Karen Armstrong, A History of God. From Abraham to Present: the 4000-year Quest for God, Mandarin,
London, 1996.
45 Dan Cohn-Sherbok, Jewish Philosophy, p. 88.

46 Alan F. Segal, The Jewish Tradition in Willard G. Oxtoby, World Religions. Western Traditions, Oxford
University Press, Toronto, Oxford, 1996.
47 Alan F. Segal, The Jewish Tradition in Willard G. Oxtoby (ed.), World Religions. Western Traditions, Oxford
University Press, Toronto, Oxford, 1996, p. 92. "O data cu capacitatea umana de a gndi, oamenii beneficiaza de
providenta lui Dumnezeu. n masura n care oamenii si folosesc capacitatile lor rationale, Dumnezeu este
capabil sa i perceapa ca individualitati si sa le conduca actiunile." (p. 91).
JSRI No.10 /Spring 2005 p. 114
48 Alan F. Segal, The Jewish Tradition, op. cit., p. 93.
49 Moshe Idel, Golem, Editura Hasefer, Bucuresti, 2003, p. 180.
50 Maurice-Ruben Hayoun, Maimonide, ed. cit., p. 42.
51 Maurice-Ruben Hayoun, Maimonide, ed. cit., pp. 83-88. Astfel, despre intelectul dobndit putem citi n
Ghidul ratacitilor, I, 31: "ti-am aratat deja ca acest intellect care se raspndeste asupra noastra din partea lui
Dumnezeu este legatura care se raspndeste ntre noi si el. Depinde de tine fie sa ntaresti si sa controlezi aceasta
legatura, fie sa o slabesti si sa o diminuezi putin cite putin, pna la a o desface. Aceasta legatura nu poate fi
ntarita dect daca o folosim pentru a-l iubi pe Dumnezeu si pentru a ne apropia de el, asa cum am aratat; ea se
slabeste si se diminueaza cnd ti ocupi gndirea cu ceea ce este nafara lui. Trebuie sa sti ca, chiar daca ai fi
omul cel mai nvatat n metafizica adevarata, daca ti ntorci gndul de la Dumnezeu si te ocupi cu totul de
mncarea ta sau de alte afaceri necesare, ai rupt aceasta legatura ce exista ntre tine si Dumnezeu si tu nu mai
esti el, dupa cum nici el nu mai este cu tine Iata de ce oamenii superiori nu folosesc dect foarte putine
momente pentru a se ocupa de alte lucruri dect de el"
52 Moshe Idel, Cabala. Noi perspective, ed. cit., p. 70.
53 Moshe Idel, Studies in Ecstatic Kabbalah, State University of New York Press, Abany, 1988, pp. 1-31.
54 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., p. 84.
55 Moshe Idel, Studies in Ecstatic Kabbalah, ed. cit., p. 28.
56 Moshe Idel, Universalization and Integration: Two Conceptions of Mystical Union in Jewish Mysticism, n
Moshe Idel and Bernard McGinn (eds.), Mystical Union in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. An Ecumenical
Dialogue, The Continuum Publishing Compahy, New York, 1996, pp. 31-32.
57 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, loc. cit., p. 503.
58 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, loc. cit., p. 508.
59 Moshe Idel, Cabalistii nocturni, traducere de Ana-Elena Ilinca, Ed. Provopress, Cluj-Napoca, 2005, p. 10.
60 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, loc. cit., p. 518.
61 Moshe Idel, Perfectiuni care absorb. Cabala si interpretare, Ed. Polirom, Iasi, 2004, p. 303.
62 Idem, p. 362.
63 Idem, p. 369.
64 Idem, p. 438.
johnadriancostache@yahoo.co.uk
Jacques Derrida, Credinta si cunoastere. Veacul si iertarea
Faith and Knowledge. Century and Forgiveness
Ed. Paralela 45, Pitesti-Bucuresti, 2004
Undeva pe la sfarsitul anului 2003, nceputul anului 2004 celor cateva traduceri din opera lui Derrida li s-a mai
adaugat una Credinta si cunoastere. Lucrarea, aparuta initial n 1995 la editorul italian Laterza si la Seuil n
Franta, cuprinde doua texte - unul, care si da titlul volumului, subintitulat Cele doua surse ale "religiei" n
limitele simplei ratiuni si Veacul si iertarea, un interviu cu Michel Wieviorka. Desi, dupa cum se vede, e mai
bine de un an de la aparitia ei, din pacate, aceasta carte a trecut aproape neobservata n cultura romana. Spunem
"din pacate" caci acest volum are o dubla importanta pentru gandirea filosofica contemporana.
n primul rand e vorba de faptul ca, prin problematica pe care o abordeaza aceea a religiei, a religiei astazi ca si
problematica a "rentoarcerii elementului religios" Derrida se angajeaza poate pentru prima oara n dialog cu
directia hermeneutica a filosofiei contemporane. Dupa cum se stie, aceasta problematica este una favorita ntre
temele gandirii lui Vattimo n anii '90, filosoful italian abordand-o explicit cu un an naintea lui Derrida n

Dincolo de interpretare. Semnificatia hermeneuticii pentru filosofie.

n al doilea rand nsa, importanta acestei carti rezida n faptul ca, punand problema ntr-o maniera kantiana, n
"limitele simplei ratiuni", filosoful francez ncearca mai presus de toate o explicitare a semnificatiei acestei
"rentoarceri a religiei" n timpurile noastre, si o punere a ei n legatura cu abstractiunea, cu ceea ce s-ar putea
numi tele-tehno-stiinta actuala. Ipoteza centrala a lui Derrida n aceasta privinta este ca fata de aceasta teletehno-stiinta care este prin ea nsasi o forta de dezradacinare si delocalizare, religia se afla n acelasi timp "n
antagonism reactiv si supralicitare reafirmativa" (p. 8).
Cum se poate explica aceasta "rentoarcere a religiei"? Asa cum arata filosoful francez, aceasta este una dintre
cele mai dificile ntrebari n fata carora suntem pusi n timpurile noastre. Caci, ce vrea aceasta sa nsemne n
fapt? Cu siguranta nu e vorba aici de nasterea fundamentalismelor si integrismelor n sanul diferitelor religii.
Islamismul nu trebuie n nici un fel confundat cu islamul, chiar daca primul se exercita n numele celui din urma
acesta este un principiu de la care trebuie pornit. De aceea, ntelegem ca ceea ce se re-ntoarce n timpurile
noastre este religiosul ca atare.
Pe de alta parte, ne arata filosoful francez, aceasta re-ntoarcere a religiosului nu este sub nici o forma o rentoarcere simpla. Nu poate fi vorba de o ntoarcere a aceluiasi n istorie, caci ceea ce se petrece acum, nu s-a
mai petrecut niciodata. Conditiile n care aceasta revenire are loc sunt total schimbate si aceasta deoarece
figurile ei - "tele-tehno-media-stiintifice", capitaliste si politico-economice sunt fara precedent.
Indiferent ca dam crezare etimologiei ciceroniene a religie (religie < lat. relegare) sau celei a lui Lactantiu si
Tertulian (religie < lat. religare), nu poate fi contestat faptul ca termenul este unul latin, iar conceptul de religie
este prin excelenta unul crestin si occidental. Asa
JSRI No.10 /Spring 2005 p. 232
cum arata Derrida, daca noua astazi ne este greu sa gandim aceasta rentoarcere a religiei, faptul se datoreaza
explicit tocmai acestei occidentalitati a religiei si a opozitiei cu ratiunea si stiinta n care am fost nvatati sa o
gandim odata cu iluminismul. Adevarul este nsa ca o atare opozitie nu exista.
Desi pentru noi astazi "problema religiei este mai ntai ntrebarea asupra ntrebarii", asa cum arata Derrida,
religia n ea nsasi este un raspuns, poate chiar RSPUNSUL. Nu exista nsa, niciodata raspuns fara principiu
de responsabilitate, ne spune filosoful francez. Orice adresare catre celalalt, ntoarcerea fetei spre altul pentru a-i
raspunde (mai ales atunci cand posibilitatea de a vedea cu ochii sai cum stau lucrurile este suspendata)
subntinde fagaduinta ca ceea ce este spus este adevarul si numai adevarul. Adresarea catre celalalt presupune
juramantul asupra adevarului a ceea ce se spune, dupa cum si ascultarea unui altul, o fiduciaritate ireductibila.
De aceea se poate spune ca, raportarea la altul care precede orice legatura sociala se bazeaza pe un act de
credinta, fiind prin excelenta un act de marturie n absolut. nsa, n masura n care orice adresare catre celalalt
este o marturie n absolut, chiar n momentul performarii sale, performativitatea sa prin ea nsasi, nu poate decat
sa instituie absolutul. Pentru Derrida, fagaduinta facuta sub juramant, luandu-l pe Dumnezeu de martor nu poate
sa nu genereze pe Dumnezeu, aproape ntr-un mod masinal.
Dar acest act de credinta, fiduciaritatea care sta la baza oricarei religii ca si o sursa ai ei sta si la baza
performativitatii tehnico-stiintifice. Am nvatat astazi n sfarsit ca actul stiintific nu este niciodata separat de
practica. Legatura dintre cunoasterea comunitatii stiintifice si orizontul interventiei efective n sfera realului
nsa, este dat tocmai de aceasta fiduciaritate elementara. Exact din aceasta cauza pretinsa opozitie dintre religie
si stiinta sau ratiune nu poate exista.
Pe langa aceasta experienta fundamentala a credintei, religia se origineaza si ntr-o alta experienta cea a
sacrului, nteles ca sfant, neatins, teafar si nevatamat. Religia presupune ntotdeauna ambele experiente, nefiind
altceva decat elipsa lor, adica tensiunea dintre ele care duce cand la mascarea uneia cand a alteia. Pentru Derrida
nsa, si aici sta toata noutatea viziunii pe care filosoful ne-o propune n aceasta chestiune, tocmai prin atitudinea
disimulata a religiei fata de propriile sale surse se poate explica atat "rentoarcerea elementului religios" n
timpurile noastre, cat si razboaiele religioase care ne traverseaza secolul.
Alianta dintre tele-tehno-media-stiinta si religie o delocalizeaza si, n termenii lui Vattimo, o slabeste pe aceasta
din urma. n cazul particular al crestinismului sau iudeo-crestinismului, aceasta delocalizare ia cu siguranta
forma universalizarii sale. De pilda, conceptele centrale ale dreptului international ca si retorica politica
mondiala sunt fundate pe un discurs eminamente crestin. Sa ne gandim numai la omniprezentele apeluri la pace,
la ntelegere si la toleranta pe care le-am auzit n ultimul timp si vom fi pe deplin edificati, caci, dupa cum se
stie, spiritul tolerantei este unul profund crestin. (De aceea, Derrida prefera sa desemneze era pe care o traim nu

atat prin englezescul mondializare, ci prin mondialatinizare.) nsa, ceea ce aduce cu sine aceasta universalizare a
crestinismului, aceasta proliferare a discursurilor pacifiste - tinute n primul rand de Papa, cel mai spectacular si
mai cederomizat om al planetei, n cuvintele lui Derrida este pentru filosoful francez tocmai re-afirmarea
nietzscheana a mortii lui Dumnezeu si reimanentizarea antropologica. Totul se petrece ca si cum ar trebui sa ne
iubim unii pe altii tocmai pentru ca nu mai exista un Dumnezeu care sa ne iubeasca; totul se petrece ca si cum
drepturile omului ar fi mai importante decat orice altceva n timpurile noastre tocmai pentru ca nu avem
JSRI No.10 /Spring 2005 p. 233
nici o datorie fata de adevarul absolut si transcendent al ordinii divine tocmai pentru ca asa ceva nu exista.
n cazul celorlalte religii, pe de alta parte, aceasta delocalizare pe care o aduce alianta dintre tele-tehno-stiinta si
religie ia forma unei dezradacinari radicale. Tocmai din aceasta cauza n sanul islamului se naste islamismul si,
n genere se nasc toate fundamentalismele. Asa cum arata Derrida, ntre diferitele fundamentalisme sau
integrisme, ntre ideologia care le anima si tipul de rationalitate pe care l aduce cu sine modernizarea teletehnologica, nu trebuie sa vedem nici o contradictie pentru ca nu exista nici una. Altfel spus, pentru un
fundamentalist musulman nu exista nici o tensiune si nici o opozitie ntre ideea pastrarii intacte a unei traditii si
faptul de a investi n tehnologie militara americana de ultima generatie.
Pe de alta parte nsa, datorita sursei sale sacrale, religia ia o atitudine de reactivitate fata de masina, tehnica si
tot ce implica acestea, constituindu-si o anumita auto-imunitate la ele. n timpurile noastre exigenta neatinsului,
a teafarului si nevatamatului este, de asemeni, cat se poate de evidenta. n sanul crestinismului si pe batranul
continent suntem astazi martorii unui respect absolut fata de viata, porunca: "Sa nu ucizi!" fiind parca singura
pe care ne-o mai amintim dintre cele zece. Totodata nsa, tot aici se da curs cu precadere si vocatiei sacrificiale
imanente oricarei religii - abatajul de masa, pescuitul si vanatoarea la scara industriala, experimentele pe
animale sunt doar cateva exemple. Asa cum arata Derrida, ideea ce sta n spatele acestei atitudini duale este ca
"viata nu are absolut nici o valoare decat cu conditia de a valora mai mult decat viata" (p. 66). Viata este sacra
sau sfanta doar n masura n care ea se sustrage sferei biologicului si poate depune marturie de ordinea
transcendentei si a divinitatii, a sacralitatii si nevatamarii sale.
n cazul diferitelor fundamentalisme, arata filosoful francez, aceasta miscare de auto-imunizare fata de masina
si tehnica poate fi vazuta n faptul ca violenta pe care o aduc cu sine razboaiele religioase pe care acestea le
pornesc este ntotdeauna de doua feluri, sau, dupa cum spune Derrida, "are doua varste". Prima este una
contemporana, bazandu-se pe mijloacele cele mai sofisticate din punctul de vedere al tele-tehnologiei militare.
Cea de-a doua nsa, este o noua violenta arhaica ce, ntorcandu-se mpotriva masinii, se situeaza n proximitatea
corpului si se bazeaza mai degraba pe sex sau pe mainile goale. Sa ne gandim numai la zecile de violuri din
timpul razboiului bosniac si vom fi profund edificati n acest sens.
Dupa cum se vede, exista o diferenta radicala ntre raspunsul pe care l ofera Derrida problemei "rentoarcerii
elementului religios" si raspunsul pe care l ofera Vattimo n lucrarea deja amintita. Pentru filosoful italian
aceasta rentoarcere (pe care o ntelege simplu prin identificarea ei cu proliferarea n discursurile etice a
principiului crestin al caritatii sau prin reafirmarea politeismului, chiar si ca politeism al valorilor) poate fi
nteleasa doar prin asumarea ca act fondator al culturii occidentale a kenozei care trebuie nteleasa mai presus
de toate ca si slabire si prin identificarea istoriei fiintei de care ne vorbeste Heidegger cu istoria mplinirii
nihilismului n Occident. n raport cu aceasta interpretare ce tine ntr-o anumita masura de o mistica filosofica,
raspunsul lui Derrida este cat se poate de clar unul mai persuasiv si mai complet.
Al doilea text care constituie volumul derridian n discutie Veacul si iertarea poate fi de o deosebita importanta
pentru cercetatorii romani n sfera religiilor si ideologiilor, caci mai deunazi se pusese problema uitarii si a
iertarii pe unele grupuri de discutii. Definitia oferita celui din urma concept, dupa cum era de asteptat din partea
filosofului francez, iese din nou din tiparele obisnuite. Exista un paradox al iertarii, ne spune Derrida, si tocmai
prin aceasta iertarea poate fi ceea ce trebuie sa fie "iertarea nu iarta decat ceea ce este de neiertat". Ea nu este si
nu poate fi n nici un fel conditionata de un act de cainta din partea vinovatului sau de o schimbare a atitudinii
sale. Caci, n cazul acesta, ce am ierta si pe cine? Putem oare ierta ceva, o fapta care nu implica fiinta ntreaga a
cuiva? Putem ierta oare pe cineva care prin cainta a devenit altul si care nu mai este acelasi cu cel care a savarsit
fapta? n aceste temeiuri, dupa Derrida, se ntelege ca iertarea nu poate fi identificata cu vreun concept juridic,
ca nu este apanajul unei persoane n nume moral (chiar daca pe scena politica internationala se face din ce n ce
mai mult recurs la iertare) si ca poate fi acordata doar de victima sau de Dumnezeu.
n ncheiere am vrea sa adaugam cateva cuvinte despre traducere. Dificultatile pe care le ridica de obicei

scriitura lui Derrida, plina de structuri sintactice greoaie, de cuvinte compuse greu asimilabile si n franceza si
de jocuri de cuvinte, sunt binecunoscute. De aceea, n cazul operei ganditorului francez, acel principiu
cantitativ-calitativ al traducerii perfecte pe care el nsusi l formuleaza n What Is a Relevant Translation? este
cu atat mai himeric, o transpunere a sensului cuvant la cuvant fiind imposibila. Si totusi, traducatorul roman al
lui Credinta si cunoastere, Emilian Cioc (cel caruia i datoram si traducerea din Positions din opera derridiana)
reuseste sa se apropie asimptotic de acest principiu caci, pe parcursul lecturii, nu de putine ori avem impresia ca
opera ar fi fost scrisa ca atare n romana. Aceasta l recomanda pe Emilian Cioc ca pe unul dintre cei mai buni
traducatori ai lui Derrida n limba romana si, totodata, recomanda Credinta si cunoastere ca pe una dintre cele
mai reusite transpuneri a unui text filosofic din ultimii ani.
Umberto Eco Cinci scrieri morale. Five Moral Writings Humanitas, Bucuresti, 2005
Reflexia etica a dobndit n ultima perioada o stringenta aparte, reusind sa atraga si autori care si-au aflat
consacrarea n alte domenii ale filosofiei. Este si cazul lui Umberto Eco, cunoscut publicului mai cu seama prin
tratatele sale de semiotica si prin romanele sale, mai nou autor al unei cartulii traduse la Humanitas sub titlul de
Cinci scrieri morale. Prin aceasta lucrare, autorul si confirma nca o data racordajul la contemporaneitate: mai
mult dect o simpla lucrare de etica, volumul lui Eco este o carte de etica aplicata, abordnd astfel segmentul cel
mai recent si mai dinamic al acestei discipline filosofice.
Cele cinci piese ale ansamblului abordeaza fiecare o tema diferita din cadrul eticii aplicate: problema razboiului,
tema fascismului, etica jurnalistica, tema alteritatii si, n fine, problema, extrem de actuala n contextul sociopolitic european, a migratiei si a intolerantei. Fiecare dintre acestea este prezentata n stilul caracteristic al lui
Eco: fara a ignora tematizarile curente, respectiv bibliografia obligatorie a temei, nsa pastrnd o prospetime si o
nota personala extrem de marcata.
Publicata n perioada Razboiului din Golf, n zilele n care trupele aliate au intrat n Kuwait City", cum
precizeaza autorul, primul text si propune sa fundamenteze, n cinci puncte teoretice, teza aparent paradoxala a
imposibilitatii razboiului. Rnd pe rnd snt avansate argumentele referitoare la potentialul nimicitor al armelor
nucleare, care elimina existenta nvingatorilor dintr-un conflict; indistinctia taberelor inamice; prezenta massmediei, care neutralizeaza actiunile neasteptate; teza foucauldiana a disiparii puterii, care duce la supraevaluarea
elementului economic; n fine, pulverizarea regulilor strategiei de razboi, n conditiile n care, astazi, sustine
autorul, razboiul nu mai seamana cu un sistem n serie" ci cu unul n paralel". Toate acestea fac ca razboiul sa
nu mai semene cu cel din manualele de strategie militara, ci cu un eveniment cu consecinte imprevizibile pentru
toata lumea: Sfrsitul probabil al unui razboi este o confuzie generala". Pornind de la aceste observatii extrem
de lucide si de realiste, Eco desprinde concluzia logica din punct de vedere etic: Este o ndatorire intelectuala
sa proclamam absurditatea razboiului". ndatorire pe care, cu consecventa autorul o respecta pna la capat.
Textul despre fascism a fost destinat initial unui public american si a fost rostit n perioada n care SUA erau
bulversate de atentatul de la Oklahoma si de descoperirea unor grupari de extrema dreapta n America. Prin
intermediul sau, Eco ncearca sa explice nrudirile de familie" dintre diversele variante de ideologii extremiste
nazism, falangism, stalinism, si n acelasi timp, fascinatia pe care o produce termenul de fascism" singurul
care, desi nu reprezinta o ideologie monolitica (sau poate tocmai de aceea), a reusit sa supravietuiasca n
contexte diferite si sa denumeasca lucruri diferite.
De altfel, ca orice ideologie, fascismul ntretine o relatie speciala cu limbajul, anumite notiuni devenind
purtatoarele unor semnificatii aparte n cazul n care snt asociate acestei ideologii. nsa fascismul mai are o
proprietate lingvistica remarcabila: el paraseste contextul originar unde a fost creat (fascismul italian), migrnd
pe continente diferite, unde si gaseste corespondente ideologice dintre cele mai diverse. Explicatia pentru
aceasta performanta" o constituie flexibilitatea remarcabila a notiunii: Termenul de fascism" se adapteaza la
tot, fiindca pot sa fie eliminate dintr-un regim fascist unul sau mai multe elemente, fara sa-i fie stirbita vreun
moment marca fascista". n acelasi timp, la fel cum Martin Marty si Scott Appleby identifica o serie de trasaturi
cheie ale fundamentalismului (comparatia nu este ntmplatoare; asa cum se poate lesne sesiza, o parte din
trasaturile cheie ale fundamentalismului se regasesc si n schema autorului italian), Eco crede ca exista un
nucleu de caracteristici a ceea ce el numeste Ur-Fascism", sau fascism etern". Si n acest caz, nu este
obligatoriu ca un regim sa posede toate caracteristicile pentru a fi denumit fascist. Aceste trasaturi snt:

traditionalismul, refuzul modernismului, cultul actiunii pentru actiune, refuzul criticii, teama de diferenta, apelul
catre clasele de mijloc frustrate, nationalismul, stigmatizarea dusmanului, glorificarea luptei (nu lupta pentru
viata" ci viata pentru lupta", cum spune Eco), elitismul si eroismul, machismul, populismul calitativ si cultul
unui limbaj specific. Din nou, la sfrsitul acestui text, Eco avertizeaza asupra consecintelor etice: pentru ca UrFascismul poate nca sa se ntoarca sub cele mai nevinovate nfatisari", datoria tuturor este de a-l demasca si de
a avertiza asupra urmarilor sale.
Textul despre presa, adresat direct ziaristilor italieni la o ntlnire cu acestia n cadrul unor seminarii, se doreste
o critica constructiva a rolului pe care mass-media (n special cea scrisa) este chemata sa-l joace ntr-o
democratie. Desi referintele lui Eco provin aproape n exclusivitate din mass-media italiana, cititorul roman va
observa, cu siguranta, aplicabilitatea lor si n cazul presei autohtone. Observatia centrala a lui Eco este aceea ca,
n lupta cu concurenta directa si mai lesne difuzata am numit aici televiziunea cotidienele italiene si pierd
functia de informare si pe cea de comentare a stirilor, intrnd n ceea ce autorul numeste ideologia
spectacolului". Cu alte cuvinte, singurul mod n care presa scrisa crede ca reuseste sa contracareze televizorul
este copierea mijloacelor acestuia: saptamnalizarea" cotidienelor (publicarea pe spatii largi a unor informatii
mondene), declansarea unor scandaluri cu orice pret, folosirea pe scara extinsa a interviurilor, fixarea obsesiva
asupra celorlalte mijloace media (presa despre presa, presa despre televiziune). Eco constata ca cel care are de
pierdut din acest joc este chiar cititorul, de aceea cere presei sa se rentoarca la rolul sau fundamental din cadrul
oricarei democratii, si anume de a furniza cetatenilor informatii solide si corecte, si nu de a cauta senzationalul
si scandalul cu orice pret.
Tema alteritatii este introdusa de autor n contextul ncercarii de fundamentare a unei etici laice" care sa nu se
mai sprijine pe un fundament transcendent. ncercarea sa se ncruciseaza cu preocuparea (de sorginte
lingvistico-filosofica) de a descoperi universalii semantice" (expresii comune care sa se ntlneasca la toate
popoarele si n toate timpurile). Eco crede ca a gasit aceste universalii n legatura cu expresiile corpului (cu totii
avem ideea de sus, jos, a merge, a sta, etc.), prilej cu care, transfernd problema n registrul etic, are ocazia sa
vorbeasca de asa-numitele drepturi ale corpurilor". Ct despre fundamentul oricarei etici, chiar lipsita fiind de
un temei religios, transcendent, Eco l descopera, n descendenta levinasiana, n fata si privirea celuilalt: nu
reusim sa ntelegem cine suntem fara privirea si raspunsul celuilalt".
n fine, ultima parte a cartii este constituita dintr-un text compus din trei bucati independente, unite nsa prin
tematica: migratie, intoleranta si intolerabil. Problema migratiei este formulata de Eco n actualitatea anului
2000, n context european: cum va arata continentul european n conditiile unei migratii tot mai extinse a
populatiilor de pe celelalte continente (african si asiatic n principal)? Raspunsul este simplu: din ce n ce mai
colorat. Corolarul acestei constatari l constituie sesizarea cresterii amplorii fenomenului rasist, care duce la
tema a doua: intoleranta. Eco analizeaza acest termen n corelatie cu alti doi la moda, propusi adesea ca
substitute: fundamentalismul si integrismul. Totusi, Eco considera ca intoleranta nu se reduce la cei doi:
intoleranta preexista oricarei doctrine". Ceea ce i se pare cu adevarat periculos este intoleranta salbatica", ce
presupune exploatarea, printr-o doctrina de tip fundamentalist sau integrist, a unui fond popular de intoleranta
profunda. Exemplele propuse snt cele clasice: vnatoarea de vrajitoare sau persecutiile evreilor, ambele posibile
datorita preexistentei unor forme de intoleranta difuza, dar constanta, la nivelul maselor.
n acest caz, care este totusi solutia? Practicarea necritica a tolerantei binevoitoare? Nu, si aici intervine cea de-a
treia bucata, despre intolerabil. Toleranta ilimitata nu este posibila deoarece exista cu adevarat lucruri de
netolerat. Exemplul este din nou unul tipic, cazul Holocaustului originala este perspectiva (din nou, etica), din
care este formulata problema: Cnd se produce un fapt iesit din comun, pragul tolerabilitatii nu
mai este cel fixat de vechile legi". Ceea ce se cere n acest caz este o solidaritate colectiva si o responsabilitate
comun mpartasita n aplicarea consecventa a legilor noi.
Dincolo de precizarile suplimentare care pot fi oricnd facute pe marginea unei astfel de lucrari, cartea lui Eco
ramne o lectura agreabila, scrisa cu talentul si umorul binecunoscut al autorului lui Baudolino sau al Numelui
trandafirului. Ea arata ca meditatia pe teme de etica aplicata este una din modalitatile n care reflectia filosofica
poate supravietui n secolul XXI, ba poate chiar deveni best-seller. Snt cunoscute de altfel, volumele unor
autori de talia lui Fukuyama sau Sloterdijk, tot pe teme etice, aparute tot la Humanitas. Nu ne ndoim ca acesta
va fi si destinul celor Cinci scrieri morale.

Moshe Idel Cabalistii nocturni Nocturnal Kabbalists

Traducere de Ana-Elena Ilinca, Ed. Provopress, Cluj-Napoca, 2005
Moshe Idel este recunoscut n lumea academica drept cel mai important hermeneut al cabalei. Este profesor la
Universitatea Ebraica din Ierusalim, preda cursuri si sustine prelegeri si conferinte la toate marile universitati
din lume. A predat si n Romania ntr-o foarte frumoasa limba romana, ce aminteste de zona Neamtului pe care
o considera pamntul unei energii privilegiate care a dat nastere unor gnditori precum Mihail Sadoveanu, Ion
Creanga sau Paisie, creatorul isihasmului romanesc.
Este autorul unei opere impresionante, accesibila n mai multe limbi, fiind situat azi n cmpul studiilor
religioase alaturi de Ioan Petru Culianu sau Mircea Eliade, ca sa mai amintim doar alti doi romani. Dintre
volumele publicate amintim: Abraham Abulafia's Works and Doctrines (Jerusalem, 1976), The Mystical
Experience in Abraham Abulafia (New York, 1988), Cabala: Noi Perspective (Bucuresti, 2000), Studies in
Ecstatic Kabbalah (New York, 1988), Language, Torah and Hermeneutics in Abraham Abulafia (New York,
1989), Golem (Bucuresti, 2003), Maimonide si mistica evreiasca (Cluj, 2001), Hasidism - ntre extaz si magie
(Bucuresti, 2001), Mesianism si mistica (Bucuresti, 1997), Messianic Mystics (New Haven, 1998), Perfectiuni
careabsorb: Cabala si interpretare (Iasi, 2004), Cabala si Eros (Bucuresti, 2005).
Editura Porovopress ne propune Cabalistii nocturni, cea mai recenta traducere din opera lui Moshe Idel,
realizata de o traducatoare de exceptie din generatia tnara, Ana Elena Ilinca. Volumul se concentreaza asupra
modului n care visul ne pune n contact cu o realitate ascunsa. Importanta visului este evaluata n legatura cu
curentul principal al misticii iudaice, Cabala. n acest cadru este important nu visul ca atare, ci tehnicile onirice
pe care visele le induc.
Importanta viselor si a tehnicilor esoterice onirice este un lucru cunoscut n spatii culturale diverse, dintre care
pot fi amintite templele si sanctuarele antice, n special cele grecesti. Moshe Idel considera ca ceea ce se
constituie ca element original n domeniul oniricului n cazul Cabalei este faptul ca tehnicile onirice iudaice nu
depind de nici un loc sacru, ca presupun o putere divina dinamica, a carei mobilitate este legata de prezenta
mesagerilor angelici care mediaza prezenta divinului n lume.
Moshe Idel ncearca sa i convinga pe specialisti ca trebuie sa acorde o mai mare importanta literaturii care
trateaza tematizarea viselor, deoarece aceasta duce la o mai buna ntelegere a magiei iudaice si a fenomenelor
conexe ale misticismului iudaic.
Importanta experientelor onirice este relevata de Moshe Idel cu referinta la doua corpusuri definitorii ale
literaturii cabalistice. Este vorba de analiza viselor interogatie n Cabala extatica (unde exista o preocupare
speciala pentru aceasta tehnica n rndul ucenicilor lui Abraham Abulafia) si n corpusul cabalistic care se mai
gaseste azi doar n manuscrise si care este desemnat de literatura ce poarta numele de Cartea entitatii receptive.
Tehnicile onirice si dovedesc importanta prin faptul ca o menire esentiala a acestora este aceea de a induce
vise si de a convinge pe Dumnezeu si pe ngeri de a se revela n aceste vise. Moshe Idel subliniaza faptul ca
misticismul presupune o mentalitate n care ntre Dumnezeu si om exista un canal mereu deschis. n momentul
n care profetismul a ncetat, acest canal parea sa se fi nchis. nsa, n chiar cele mai conservatoare cercuri ale
literaturii rabinice se accepta faptul ca acest canal a ramas deschis iar modul privilegiat de acces la aceasta
deschidere este descris de literatura cabalei ca fiind cel oferit de vise si de tehnicile onirice legate de numele
divin.
Cartea lui Moshe Idel ofera ntlnirea cu manuscrise uitate si cu o traditie mistica pe care cel mai adesea o
percepem inadecvat. Lectura cartii Cabalistii nocturni este un bun prilej de intrare n una dintre cele mai
fascinante lumi. Este totodata o carte deschizatoare de ntrebari n legatura cu ceea ce este ascuns n viata
nocturna a lumii noastre care se cere mereu revrajita.

PSIHOLOGIE
Termenul psihologie provine din grecescul psyche [soul] + logos [word] dar nu este paulin. Este folosit
pentru a denota aspecte ale antropologiei lui Pavel, atta timp ct recunoatem c Pavel vede fiina uman ca o
unitate psihosomatic n care raiunea, emoia i funciile fizice sunt integrate total. Ne vom concentra atenia
asupra folosirii lui Pavel a cuvintelor kardia (inim), nous (minte), pneuma (duh), psyche (suflet,
via), sarx (carne) i eso anthropos (persoana luntric).
1. Psihologia Paulin n Studiul Modern.
Istoria cercatrii n fiecare dintre termenii amtropologiei lui Pavel a fost cronicat (prin 1970) de ctre R.
Jewett. Punctele urmtoare examineaz sursele principale care i-au preocupat pe cercettori n acest domeniu.
1.1. Dihotomie sau Trihotomie? Din zilele Prinilor Bisericii pn prin 1850 aceast ntrebare a fost n centrul
discuiilor despre antropologia lui Pavel: Este fcut omul din dou pri (trup i suflet) sau din trei pri (trup,
suflet i duh)? Prinii greci au favorizat-o pe cea de-a doua, pe cnd parinii Latini pe prima.Prin influena lui
Augustin i a reformatorilor Protestani, dihotomia a devenit un punct de vedere stabil n teologia din Vest; ns
dezbaterea a continuat (Bekouwer, 194-233; Hoekema, 204-10). ntr-o versiune a trihotomiei Dumnezeu ocup
duhul (persoana luntric) elibernd-o din sclavia sufletului (persoana exterioar) i de trup (persoana din
afar) i fcndu-le servile duhului. Dihotomia, ns, rmne punctul de vedere principal. J.G. Machen, de
exemplu, a afirmat c Biblia ntr-un mod indiscutabilrecunoate prezena a dou principii distincte sau
substane n om trupul i sufletul su (Machen, 143); suflet i duh denot aceeai realitate (Machen, 159-73).
Mai recent ns, Hoekema, a respins cuvntul dihotomie (a tia n dou), argumentnd c Biblia descrie
persoana uman ca o totalitate, un ntreg, o fiin unitar care n aceast via prezent nu prea poate fi tiat
(Hoekema, 210).
Cadrul Antic. nvtura modern a insistat pe drept cuvnt ca antropologia lui Pavel s fie interpretat prin
lumina mediului su istoric i cultural.
1.2.1. Cadrul Elenistic. La nceputul acestui secol unii nvai au susinut c Pavel afost puternic
influenat de filozofia neebraic i religia popular, idei care probabil i-au fost meditate prin Iudaismul
Elenistic sau biserica Elenistic (vezi Elenism). Printre sugestiile n favoarea acestei increderi, sau
influene, sunt: (1) Folosirea lui Pavel a cuvntului sarkikos (i sarkinos, carnal), psychikos (fizic,
natura) i pneumaticos (spiritual), i mesajul su despre renoirea lui nous i mntuirea lui pneuma
prin gnosis (cunoatere) i sophia (nelepciune) n 1 Corinteni 2:6-16; 3:1-4; 5:5, arat datoria sa
pretins fa de gnosticism. (2) Tema paulin a beligerenei ntre sarx pneuma (Galateni 5:16-26;
Romani 8:1-17) revoc dualismul metafizic al lui Platon (duhul este bun, materia este rea) i are precedeni
n gnosticism i religii misterioase. (3) Distincia ntre eu-l exterior i eu-l interior (ex., 2 Cor 4:16) poate fi
urmrit pn la un dualism elenistic antropologic. Dar toate aceste preri au fost provocate.
1.2.2. Cadrul Ebraic. Cea de-a doua parte a secolului douzeci a fost martor la un acord savant n
cretere. (1) c Pavel a atendatat sau s-a opus fa de cea mai mare parte a nvturii neebraice de care el
pretinde c ar fi depins, i (2) c influenele decisive asupra lui (afar de Isus i Cretinismul timpuriu) au
fost Vechiul Testament i Iudaismul Palestinian (vezi Paul, the Jew). Unele dintre punctele cheie sunt: (1)
ca i n Vechiul Testament grija lui Pavel nu este natura uman ci relaia ei cu Dumnezeu (Jacob in Dihle et al.,
630-31; Stacey, 3). (2) Sarx la Pavel nu denot partea fireasc a omului mpotriva prii divine. n schimb,
ca i corespondentul su din Vechiul Testament basar, sarx semnaleaz diferena radical dintre Dumnezeu i
om, i relaia dintre ei; cuvntul trup descrie ntreaga persoan ca fiind o creatur slab, vulnerabil care
depinde n totalitate de Dumnezeu (Schweizer i Baumgartel, 123). (3) n marea majoritate a cazurilor la Pavel,
pneuma desemneaz nu duhul uman ci pe Duhul Sfnt sursa esenial pentru via i putere, la fel ca ruah
Yahweh n Vechiul Testament. Pneumatikos (ex., 1 Cor 2:15) identific o persoan care cunoate lucrarea de
Mntuire a lui Dumnezeu prin puterea Duhului lui Dumnezeu (Schweizer in Kleinknecht el al., 436). Trupul
spiritual (soma pneumatikon) trebuie neles nu ca ceva care este alctuit din pneuma, ci ca ceva care este
controlat de pneuma (Schweizer in Kleinknecht el al., 421; cf. ! Cor 15:44-45). (4) La Pavel, ca i n Vechiul
Testament kardia indic nucleul persoanei ca fiind o fiin raional, sentimental i volitiv (Baumgartel and
Behm 606-7; Jacob in Dihle et al., 626-28). (5) La Pavel psyche nu nseamn suflet, ci viaa sau existena
persoanei ca i n Geneza 2:7, i omul s-a fcut astfel un suflet viu [Ebr nepes, LXX psyche]. Psychikos (1
Cor 2:14) indic persoana natural lipsit de Duhul lui Dumnezeu. n mod corespunztor, toi care sunt n
Adam i care experimenteaz viaa i moartea existenei prezente posed un trup natural (soma psychikon; !

Cor 15:42-46). (6) Termenii antropologici folosii de Pavel, sunt adnc nrdcinai n Ve 10 i Efes 4:22-24
[mpreun cu referinele la Adam i Cristos n Rom 5: 12-21 i 1 Cor 15:21-22, 45-47]).
1.2.3. O ndatorire Dubl. Recunoscnd mpletitura gndirii greceti i ebraice din zilele lui Pavel, i dndu-i
seama de cele dou mpletiri, muli savani cred c antropologia lui datoreaz ceva fiecreia dintre ele.
(1) Unii detecteaz o schimbare n scrierile lui Pavel dintr-o privelite iudaic spre o perspectiv elenistic. ntro lucrare despre antropologia lui Pavel publicat n 1872, H. Ludermann argumenteaz c rscumprarea
menionat n Galateni (elocvent dintr-o perspectiv ebraic timpurie a lui Pavel) rscumprarea era o
transformare fizic-moral din trup n duh prin comuniunea cu Duhul Sfnt (Ellis, 24). ntr-un articol
publicat n 1934, C. H. Dodd a argumentat c escatologia lui Pavel a devenit mai puin ebraic i mai mult
elenist ntre scrierile din 1 Corinteni 15 (renvierea trupului spiritual la revenirea lui Isus) i 2 Corinteni 5
(primirea unei case eterne n cer la moarte; cf. Ellis, 32).
(2) Unii observ n scrieri o tensiune continu ntre elementele ebraice i elenistice. Conform lui Bultmann,
Pavel se opune unor noiuni gnostice apreciate (cum ar fi devalorizarea trupului), dar vede o fisur att de
adnc n om, o mare ncordare ntre sine i sinenct el se apropie foarte mult de un dualism Gnostic
(Bultmann, 1.199). n mod similar, spune Bultmann, n timp ce Pavel la nceput folosete psyche n Vechiul
Testament cu sensul de via sau persoan, folosirea de ctre el a termenului ntr-un neles depredicativ
n contrast cu pneuma trdeaz o influen gnostic (Bultmann, 1.204).
(3) Concepia mai general a lui W. D. Stacey (Stacey, 39) este c antropologia lui Pavel a fost fundamental
cretin; c el n general folosea limba ebraic (cum ar fi kardia i sarx) pentruc Evanghelia lui a izvort din
Vechiul Legmnt; cum c elenismul a oferit cteodat un termen mult mai adecvat (cum ar fi nous,
nelepciune, sau syneidesis, contiina moral); i c el nu inteniona s lege dou culturi (Iudaismul i
Elenismul) ci cuta s-i exprime punctul su de vedere cretin despre umanitate n cea mai bun limb
disponibil.
(4) R. Jewett argumenteaz c motivul principal pentru prezena elementelor elenistice n scrieri pe lng
elementele motenite din Vechiul Testament i Iudaism, este c Pavel, cu scopuri polemice, a mprumutat
frecvent termeni antropologici de la partenerii lui de conversaii, redefinindu-i pentru a-i potrivi argumentelor
lui dup nevoie (Jewett, 447).
1.2.4. Monism sau Dualism? Relatat la chestiunea precedent , se ridic ntrebarea dac antropologia lui Pavel
este monist sau dualist: sunt oamenii creai dintr-o singur substan sau dou (vezi Machen sub 1.1 sus), sau
aa dup cum prefer unii s pun ntrebarea, sunt sufletul i trupul indivizibile (dei conceptual remarcabile)
sau divizibile (dei ideal inseparabile)? Muli, probabil majoritatea savanilor contemporani au ales prima
opiune, alii au ales o form de monism. Un dualism cosmic sau escatologic sau moral este vzut la Pavel (vezi
Cosmology; Escatology), dar antropologia lui se spune c ar fi monistic, sau chiar fundamental (orice
eviden a dualismului este minim i neesenial, o urm a influenei Greceti, cf. discuiilor n Whiteley, 3234; Jewett, 82-95; Ridderbas, 29-32). Acesta este punctul de vedere, de exemplu, al lui Bultmann (Omul nu
este alctuit din dou pri [soma, psyche i pneuma], 1.209) iar din observaia lui Stacey (separarea lui psyche
de sarx nseamnextincia lui Pavel, Stacey, 126).
Dou argumente sunt enumerate comun n susinerea acestui punct de vedere: (1) n timp ce unele expresii ale
iudaismului din zilele lui Pavel erau dualistice datorit influenei greceti (Sjberg in Kleinknecht et al., 377;
Lohse in Dihle et al., 635-37), antropologia Vechiului Testament, sursa principal a gndirii lui Pavel asupra
subiectului, este monistic. Iacob susine c distinciile mai vechi ntre dihotomie i trihotomie trebuiesc
abandonate n ceea ce privete antropologia Vechiului Testament. Antropologia israelit este monistic
Unitatea naturii umane nu este exprimat de conceptele autentice ale trupului i sufletului ci de conceptele
complementare i inseparabile ale trupului i vieii (Jacob in Dihle et al., 631). (2) n acord cu nepes din
Vechiul Testament (vezi 1.2.2. sus) psyche la Pavel nu denot niciodat partea superioar a omului (Pavel
niciodat nu leag soma i psyche ca fiind dou pri ale unui ntreg) sau un suflet nemuritor, imaterial
(Jewett, 334-46; Schweizer in Dihle et al., 650, 655-56; Guthrie, 165). Pavel nu poate concepe nici o existen
viitoare uman dup moarteca i mod de existen fr soma, i nu cunoate concepia greco-elenistic a
imortalitii sufletului (eliberat din trup) (Bultmann, 1.192, 203; cf. Ellis, 24).
Aceast citire asupra lui Pavel a fost provocat de Gundry i Cooper. Conform lui Gundry dualitatea
antropologic i nu unitatea monadic, descrie cel mai bine punctul de vedere al lui Pavel (Gundry, 79, 83):
persoana ntreag (uman anthropos) este alctuit dintr-o latur corporal i una imaterial (ale cror funcii

diverse sunt descrise de: pneuma, psyche, kardia, nous, eso anthropos, etc.); exist o dualitate ontologic, un
pluralism funcional, i o unitate boltit (Gundry, 84; cf.156). Termenii lui Cooper pentru antropologia paulin
i biblic general (Cooper, 50, 179) sunt un holism funcional (contrar holismului ontologic) i un
dualism holistic (contrar monismului holistic).
Unele argumente n favoarea acestei concluzii sunt:
(1) La fel ca n Vechiul Testament, Pavel nfieaz umanitatea ca fiind un ntreg total integrat, n care
funciile psihologice i fizice sunt unite inexplicabil mpreun dar rmn distincte ontologic. Termenii pentru o
funcie material sau nematerial (cum ar fi soma sau pneuma) pot fi aplicai de sinedoc ntregii fiine; dar ce
reprezint ntregul nu este egal cu ntregul.
(2) n Vechiul Testament i la Pavel (la fel ca n majoritatea iudaismului intertestamental) persoanele nu sunt
doar distinse de trupurile lor pmnteti, sunt separabile de ele i pot continua s existe fr ele (Cooper, 77);
aa nva Pavel n 2 Corinteni 5:1-10; Filipeni 1:21-24. (Pentru aceste dou argumente, vezi Gundry, 177-56;
Cooper, 36-103, 147-72).
(3) Dualismul holistic al lui Pavel este total opus altor tipuri de dualisme n lumea antic (pentru c Gundry
prefer dualitate), n care sarx sau soma sunt n esenial rele, iar psyche sau pneuma sunt n esenial bune, i
salvarea const n eliberarea sufletului de trup. Pavel este nspimntat de o moarte fr trup (2Cor 5:15) pentru
c este nenatural i anormal, necesitnd o tiere n dou (o dihotomie) a ceea ce Dumnezeu a creat ca ntreg
(ceea ce ar putea explica de ce Pavel nu aplic psyche niciodat unei asemenea existene). Acea perioad este
ntr-adevr o stare intermediar; mntuirea final ateapt reintegrarea persoanei la nvierea trupului (1Cor
15:42-58; Fil 3:2021; vezi Gundry, 149-54, 159-83; Cooper, 89-103, 152-63, 173-95).
1.3. Gndirea Contemporan. Aceste eforturi de a-l interpreta pe Pavel n lumina din vremea lui este de
asemenea o mrturie pentru impactul curenilor moderni ai gndirii. O serie de micri intelectuale au format
percepiile psihologiei pauline.
1.3.1. Idealismul. Teologul F. C. Bauer care a trit n secolul IX, influenat de idealismul lui G. W. F. Hegel, a
susinut c rzboiul dintre sarx i pneuma a reprezentat conflictul dintre finit i relativ i infinit i absolut
(ridderbos, 16). Unii susintori ai panpsihismului ( o diversitate a monismului idealist conform cruia
persoana este alctuit dintr-un singur element metafizic-suflet, minte sau duh) cred n moartea trupului, dar i
n imortalitatea sufletului (Cooper, 21 n.36; 51 n.26; 236-37).
1.3.2. Liberalismul. H. Ldermann i H. J. Holtzmann caracterizeaz liberalismul clasic explicnd conflictul
dintre carne i duh n termeni etici duali: pentru ei sarx este omul exterior luptndu-se mpotriva omului
interior spiritual (Jewett, 52-55). Aadar duhul nu mai este privitca fiind antiteza finitului i a umanului
(ca la Baur), ci ca antipod a senzualului. Duhul [=nous] ca principiu raional prim n om trebuie s
dobndeasc victoria asupra naturii senzuale degradate (sarx) i s o menin supus (Ridderbos, 18).
1.3.3. Existenialismul. Bultmann argumenteaz c concepia Paulin despre conflictul ntre sarx i pneuma este
mult mai profund dect a realizat liberalismul. n Galateni 5 i Romani 8 pneuma face referin la Duhul
Domnului, nu la duhul uman (unde Pavel vorbete despre cel din urm, nu este un principiu superior n sine
sau un intelect special sau aptitudine spiritual a sa, ci pur i simplu sinele su 1.206); iar sarx nu este partea
senzual, degradat a sinelui ci sinele ntreg orientat nspre el nsui i independent de Dumnezeu o autocentralizare care se exprim prin rebeliune mpotriva lui Dumnezeu i prin zel pentru religie (Bultmann, 1.23246; cf. Fil 3:3-6; Schweizer i Baumgartel, 131-34). Fiecare persoan trebuie s decid dac vrea s triasc
dup felul crnii (independent ncreztor n propriile sale puteri, cutnd sfritul cuiva pentru a se slvi pe
sine) sau s triasc dup felul Domnului (n care Dumnezeu este centrul ateniei i este recunoscut ca fiind
sursa vieii i a puterii, iar Cristos n locul sinelui (eu-lui) devine obiectul credinei i al laudei).
1.3.4. Materialismul. n aceast form a monismului (opus idealismului, vezi 1.3.1. sus) se crede c oamenii
sunt alctuii numai din materie i funciile ei. De exemplu, n comportament i epifenomenalism, mintea i
sufletul nu sunt mai mult dect o combinaie aunor stri cauzate de creier (Cooper, 18-19).
1.3.5. Psihologia. Prin exegeza psihologic G. Theissen caut s descopere relevana lui Pavel la dezbaterile
curente n domeniul psihologiei. De exemplu, deoarece religia necesit o confruntare cu subcontientul, este
avantajos s explore asemenea subiecte cum ar fi dezvluirea inimii la judecata din urm (1Cor 4:1-5; Rom
2:16); elucidarea limbii subcontientului (limbii) prin interpretare i profeie
(1 Cor 14); i iluminarea cretin (prin Evanghelie i prin Duhul) ca mijloc prin care materiile cufundate n
subcontient (Fil 3:4-6) sunt aduse la cunotin (Rom 7:7-23; 1 Cor 2:6-16), ameninrile lor fiind ndeprtate

i aspectele benefice nrolate n slujba lui Cristos.

1.3.6. Monism contra Dualism. Nici monismul idealismului care reduce persoana la un suflet, nici monismul
materialismului care reduce persoana la un trup nu este compatibil cu Pavel. Nici nu sunt aceste forme
contemporane ale dualismului care ncurajeaz (1) mntuirea sufletului i deprecierea trupului,
(2) neatenia la unitatea psihosomatic a persoanei i (3) o dihotomie ntre har i natur (cf. Hoekema, 222-26).
Tot odat diagnosticul care fuzioneaz dualisme ilegale cu distincia dintre trup-suflet este greit (Cooper,
209,cf. 198-209).
1.4. Poziia Prezent. Aceast seciune poate fi ncheiat indicnd poziia din care acest capitol este scris.
(1) De mult timp nvaii au dezbtut punctul pn la care scrierile atribuite lui Pavel pot fi folosite ca surse ale
propriei sale gndiri. De exemplu, Jewett, exclude Coloseni, Efeseni i Pastoralele din analizele sale; Bultmann
exclude pe cele cinci i 2 Tesaloniceni. Urmtoarea dezbatere face socoteala la toate cele treisprezece scrieri. Un
studiu mai profund trebuie s considere cum se relateaz distribuirea i folosirea termenilor la ntrebarea
paternitii.
(2) Pavel folosete termeni antropologici n contiena cadrelor elenistice i ebraice (ndatorirea sa la cea din
urm fiind mult mai mare), pentru singurul motiv de a propaga Evanghelia cretin i explicnd mntuirea n
Cristos (tot aa i Stacey, 235-41; cf. 1.2.3. sus). Pentru a reflecta aceast perspectiv termenii v-or fi anexai
mpreun ntr-un interes abordabil. O tratare mai detailat ar trebui s ntrebe: (i) ce descoper distribuirea
termenilor despre interesele teologice i pastorale ale lui Pavel i (controversal) ce lumin arunc aceste interese
asupra semnificaiei termenilor (cf. Jweett) ; i (ii) ce dezvluie ordinea cronologic a scrierilor despre
dezvoltrile n antropologia lui Pavel ?
(3) Psihologia paulin, la fel ca cea a Bibliei este mai mult practic dect tiinific (Wright in Brown et al.,
567); aceste scrieri nu nva o antropologie sau o psihologie teoretic i poate fi numit pre-filozofic
(Cooper, 112, 180). Dar dei Scriptura nu d o nvtur filozofic, totui asigur un cadru normativ pentru o
antropologie cretin (Cooper, 197). Privirea cu care psihologia paulin este cel mai mult compatibil este
dualitatea antropologic sau holismul funcional i dualismul holistic (vezi 1.2.4. i 1.3.6. sus). Va fi deci
necesar s se dea o oarecare atenie termenilor antropologici (remarcabil soma) tratai altundeva n acest volum.
2. Persoana ca i Creaie a lui Dumnezeu.
O consideraie a sinelui nainte de cdere ne va ajuta s nelegem mai bine ce spune Pavel despre impactul
pcatului i respectiv despre Cristos.
2.1. Diversitatea Persoanei n Unitate. n acord cu antecedenii Evrei i Greci, Pavel vede persoana ca fiind
corporal dar, i imaterial. Cuvntul an" SIZE=2>] noastr muritoare
(2 Cor 4:10-11). A fi absent n trup (1 Cor 5:3) este unul i acelai lucru cu a fi absent n carne
(2 Cor 2:5; cf. Col 1:22 trupul Lui de carne). Slbiciunea crnii (Gal 4:13-15) i epuul din carne (2 Cor
12:7) descrie aceleai infirmiti fizice (vezi Healing, Sickness).
Pavel descrie activitatea imaterial prin diveri termeni a cror semnificaii coincid considerabil (Gundry, 156;
Kummel, 43). Nu este nici o diferen semnificativ ntre prezena apostolului n duh [pneuma] (1 Cor 5:3) i
prezena lui cu inima [kardia] (1 Tes 2:17). Una judec i nelege cu mintea [nous] (1 Cor 14:14-16), dar
inima (kardia) poate fi la fel de luminat (2 Cor 4:6; Efes 1:18) i duhul [pneuma] persoanei nelege
lucrurile persoanei (2 Cor 2:11; cf. Efes4:23, duhul [pneuma] minii [nous]). n 2 Corinteni 6:11-12
splanchna (versiunea NIV afeciune) i kardia sunt expresii sinonime de dragoste. Ascultarea din inim
[kardia] (Rom 6:17; 1 Tim 1:5) este la fel cu ascultarea din suflet [psyche] (Efes 6:6; Col 3:23; versiunea
NIV inim) i slujind n duhul meu (Rom 1:9; versiunea NIV din toat inima). A rmnea n duhul
[pneuma] nseamn a se lupta cu sufletul [psyche] (Fil 1:27) dei aici grija lui Pavel nu este o psihologie
personal ci scopul armoniei credinciosului.
Pavel distinge imaterialul i corporalul (pag 769). El vorbete despre a fi devotat lui Dumnezeu n trup [soma]
i duh [pneuma] (1 Cor 7:34); despre a fi absent n trup dar prezent n duh (1 Cor 5:3), i despre a fi separat
n persoan, dar nu n inim [kardia] (1 Tes 2:17 NRSV). El le cere cititorilor s se purifice de orice
ntinciune a crnii [sarx] i a duhului [pneuma] (2 Cor 7:1).
Cu cele scrise mai sus unim distincia lui Pavel ntre interior i exterior. Adevrata circumcizie nu este n
afar ci nuntru, nu n carne ci n inim (Rom 2:28-29). Duhul omului este n el (1Cor22:11).
Anumite persoane se laud cu aparena exterioar dar nu cu cea din inim (2 Cor 5:12 NRSV). Dimensiunea
corporal mbrieaz ntr-un mod evident interiorul dar totodat i exteriorul, organele ascunse ca i pe cele

vizibile. Mai mult, Pavel descrie anumite funcii nemateriale cu termeni care de asemenea ar mai putea denota
organe ale trupului de exemplu, literalul kardia (inima) sau splanchna (diferite intestine, ficatul, rinichii,
plmnii sau inima; cf. Baumgrtel i Behm, 606-11; Kster, 548-53).
n lumina aceasta este nevoie ca dou puncte s fie accentuate egal. (1) Pavel niciodat nu limiteaz o funcie
imaterial la un anumit organ al trupului. n versetele citate mai sus, kardia nu simbolizeaz literalul inim ci
pentru ntreaga fiin interioar a omului n contrast cu partea sa exterioar (Baumgrtel i Behm, 612). n 2
Corinteni 3:3 inima de carne nu este mai literal dect scrierea de mn a Duhului. Interesul lui Pavel n
splanchna nu este unul psihologic. Acesta este cel mai expresiv termen disponibil pentru a indica sursa
sentimental uman (Silva, 55); prin metonimie, Pavel se concentreaz asupra sentimentului nsui (splanchna
n Filimon 12 poate fi tradus cu inim sau dragoste, BAGD). (2) Pavel niciodat nu disociaz imaterialulinterior de corporalul-interior. O parte esenial a sensului [i. e. literal] original a fost pstrat pn la punctul n
care splanchna afecteaz i exprim personalitatea total pn la cel mai adnc nivel (Kster, 555). Tot aa i
kardia ia aceeai poziie pentru ntreaga persoan dinuntru n ambele dimensiuni: corporal i imaterial.
Astfel frica, suprarea sau bucuria face ca inima s bat mai rapid.
2.2 Unitatea Persoanei n Diversitate. Diversitatea sinelui n unitate trebuie inut n vedere n continuare. Dar
accentuarea este mult mai mare n scrierile lui Pavel asupra sinelui ca un ntreg integrat.
La Pavel kardia este integrarea centrului uman ca o fiin raional, emotiv i voitoare (Dunn 1988, 100; cf.
2.1. sus; Baumgartel and Behm, 612; Ladd, 475). Astfel inima poate fi luminat (Efes 1:18); poate experimenta
suferin (2 Cor 2:4); i din inim vine ascultarea (Rom 6:17).
Deseori Pavel denot ntregul sine prin intermediul unor termeni care n alte contexte desemneaz un aspect sau
o dimensiune a sinelui. Fcnd aa, el nu contrazice alte ntrebuinri sau s confunde parialul cu ntregul. Mai
degrab, prin sinecdoc el privete ntreaga persoan dintr-un punct de vedere anumit, sau accentueaz
contribuia unui aspect anumit la funcionarea ntregului.
A prezenta trupurile [somata] ca jertfe vii (Rom 12:1) sau a-i oferi membrele (Rom 6:13, 19; versiunea
NIV pri ale trupului) nseamn a v oferi pe voi niv (Rom 6:13, 16). n Romani 12:1 soma denot
persoana n corporalitatea ei, n relaia ei concret n mijlocul acestei lumi; pentru c este trup, poate omul
experimenta lumea i se poate relata la alii (Dunn 1988, 709; cf. Gundry, 50). Totui soma nu este echivalent
cu ntreaga persoan; mintea i voina sunt active n oferirea trupului (Rom 12:1-2)
ntr-un mod asemntor sarx poate indica ntreaga fiin uman sau toat umanitatea (vezi Flesh) n anumite
privine ca fiine care (1) prin natur sunt dependente, limitate i slabe (Rom 6:19; carnea i sngele, Gal
1:16; 1 Cor 15:50; Efes 6:12; (2) devizarea i aderarea la anumite standarde (nu muli nelepi conform crnii,
1 Cor 1:26); (3) aparine unei linii de descendeni (ex. Rom 1:3; 4:1; 9:3); i (4) atitudinea n relaia cu alte
fiine umane i cu Dumnezeu (Fil 16, i n chip firesc i n Domnul; Rom 3:20). n nici unul dintre aceste
pasaje sarx nu este nfiat ca aparinnd pcatului (dar vezi 3 jos; cf. 1.2.2. sus; Thiselton, 674-75).
Psyche (suflet n exemplele precedente) poate de asemenea indica ntreaga viaa a cuiva sau, prin metonimie,
ntreaga persoan. Astfel, n dragostea noastr fierbinte pentru voi, eram gata s v dm nu numai Evanghelia
lui Dumnezeu, dar chiar i viaa noastr [psychai] (1 Tes 2:8). Epafrodit a fost aproape de moarte pentru
lucrul lui Cristos, i i-a pus viaa n joc [psyche] (Fil p 2:30): ntreaga sa via pmnteasc sau natural a fost
n pericol, nu numai sufletulsu (vezi Rom 2:9; 11:3; 13:1; 16:4;
2 Cor 1:23). Asemenea ntrebuinare este pur ebraic (Jacob in Dihle et al., 620). Ca i soma, psyche
desemneaz persoana dintr-un punct de vedere anumit: omul fiind o persoan care gndete, lucreaz i simte
(Ladd, 460); eu-l, persoan sau personalitateomul ntreg, cu tot ceea ce crede, sper i se strduie (Harder,
683). ntr-un mod asemntor nous poate nsemna omul ntreg gnditor, omul ca i creatur capabil de
nelegere (Guthrie, 169).
n timp ce corporalul i imaterialul sunt distinse, activitatea dinamic ntre ele mrturisete unitatea persoanei.
Distincia ntre soma i psyche este strict antropologic i nu etic: trupul nu este inerent ru (este o parte bun a
creaiei bune a lui Dumnezeu); iar sufletul nu este un sine mai nalt care este protejat prin natur de ispit i
pcat. Mai mult, n creaie sufletul, departe de a fi destinat s stpneasc sau s se elibereze din trup, i
mplinete scopul cu exactitate n relaie cu trupul. Viaa indicat de psyche este o existen a trupului - care
ajut s explice de ce psyche poate fi angajat de ctre sinecdoc pentru ntreaga persoan. Psyche este vitalitatea
persoanei din punctul de vedere al trupului i crnii sale (Ladd, 460), ca i cu nepes n Vechiul Testament
(vezi Jacob in Dihle et al., 620). Din cauza interpretrii lor sufletul este o animare a trupului iar trupul este

ncarnarea sufetului. Sufletul are un trup iar trupul are un suflet i omul pentru a fi ntreg este construit din
ambele, o unitate psiho-fizic (Gundry, 121).
Tot la fel se poate spune despre trup i duh. Pavel nu privete pneuma ca o scnteie divin ncarcerat n fizic,
sufletul mainriei (Dunn in Kamlah et al., 694). Eu-l care ca i duh, experimenteaz o comuniune cu
Dumnezeu este o fiin cu trup. n momentul n care Pavel distinge soma de pneuma el le unete n devotament
cu Cristos (1 Cor 7:34). Mntuirea mbrieaz deodat i trupul (1 Cor 6:12-20; 15) i duhul (1 Cor 5:5). ntrun mod asemntor oferind soma solicit renoirea lui nous (Rom 12:1-2).
Pavel de asemenea leag carnea (sarx ca i sinonim al lui soma) de duh. Ambele trebuiesc purificate dac
persoana este s devin sfnt (2 Cor 7:1). Este instructiv s se alture dou texte: N-am avut linite [anesim]
n duhul meu [pneuma], fiindc n-am gsit pe fratele meu Tit (2 Cor 2:13); Cci i dup venirea noastr n
Macedonia, trupul nostru [sarx] n-a avut nici o odihn [anesin]. Am fost necjii n toate chipurile: de afar
lupte, dinluntru temeri (2 Cor 7:5). Duhul i carnea nu sunt interschimbabile: turbulena luntric
(pneuma) afecteaz exteriorul (sarx); Pavel i alege cu grij termenii dup un model de dualitate
antropologic (Gundry, 144). Totui el descrie o experien; ngrijorarea sa pentru Tit i Corinteni l afecteaz
n ntregime.
1 Tesaloniceni 5:23, cu treismul su duh [pneuma], suflet [psyche] i carne [soma], pare s mpart persoana
n trei pri. Dar intenia lui Pavel era de fapt exact invers: Dumnezeul pciis v sfineasc El nsui pe
deplin [holoteleis]; i duhul [holokleron] vostru, sufletul vostru i trupul vostru s fie pzite ntregi fr prihan
la venirea Domnului nostru Isus Cristos. Departe de a diseca persoana, Pavel i exprim ndejdea c
credincioii, prin lucrarea de sfinire a lui Dumnezeu, sunt salvai de la dezintegrare i c au perseverat ca nite
fiine ntregi (holos). El mbin cei trei termeni mpreun (aici doar n scrisorile sale) mai mult pentru
accentuare dect pentru definire (Guthrie, 165; cf. Deut 6:5; Mat 22:37).
2.3. Experiena Persoanei despre Cunoatere. Ca i creaturi fcute n imaginea divin, oamenii au o capacitate
unic pentru a-L cunoate pe Dumnezeu. Cunoaterea determin folosirea lui nous. Mintea mea tie c Legea
este bun i dorete s-o mplineasc (Rom 7:14-23). Decizii despre zile speciale convocate pentru deliberri
raionale: Fiecare s fie deplin ncredinat n mintea lui (Rom 14:5). Inima (kardia) de asemenea are capaciti
intelectuale. Minile [noemata] le sunt ntunecate Israeliilor pentru c o nfram le acopere inima [kardia] (2
Cor 3:14-15) unde Pavel descrie nu efectul unui organ sau al al altuia, ci tocirea puterii cognitive a inimii
cuiva (kardiai i noemata sunt din nou apropiate paralel n Filip 4:7). Dac adevrul despre Dumnezeu se
dorete s fie apucat, kardia trebuie s fie luminat (2 Cor 4:1-6; Efes 1:17-19). Mai mult, contiina
(syneidesis) ia hotrri raionale cnd evalueaz aciunile cuiva (Rom 2:15).
Dar a cunoate nu este pur cognitiv. La Pavel nous-ul este un loc al hotrrilor morale ale cror deliberri
ntotdeauna afecteaz voina (Behm, in Behm and Wrthwein, 958-59; Ladd, 476; Bultmann, 1.211). Renoirea
nous-ului este necesar pentru a cunoate i a face voia lui Dumnezeu (Rom 12:1-2). A fi cineva convins n
mintea lui afecteaz comportamentul (Rom 14:1-8) i se transform ntr-o via de sfinenie (Ef 4:20-32). ntrun mod similar phroneo denot o atitudine a minii care gsete exprimare n voin (Bultmann, 1.214). Odat
ce atitudinea credinciosului este ca i a lui Cristos (Filip 2:2, 5, unde phroneo se ntmpl de trei ori), ei vor
deveni asculttori ca i El (Filip 2:6-11). Cnd cretinii se gndesc la lucrurile de sus (Col 3:2, phroneo),
purtarea lor va deveni sfnt (Col 3:5-17). Umblarea (phronema) dup lucrurile firii sau ale Duhului (Rom
8:6-7) determin un nou mod de via (Rom 8:1-17). Perspicacitatea lui kardia este de asemenea legat de
conduit. Neamurile demonstreaz lucrarea Legii n inimile lor fcnd ceea ce cere legea (Rom 2:14-15).
Fiecare s dea dup cum a hotrt n inima lui
(2 Cor 8:7). Ascultarea de nvtura apostolic vine din inim (Rom 6:17).
Pneuma desemneaz capacitatea sinelui cu trei feluri de cunoateri:
Cunoaterea sinelui. n adevr, cine dintre oameni cunoate lucrurile omului, afar de duhul
[pneuma] omului, care este n el? (1 Cor 2:11). n aceast ntrebare pneuma reprezint dou modeluri ale
sinelui. Sinele ntreg (ce cunoate duhul omului, aceea omul cunoate) i dimensiunea interioar sau nematerial
ale sinelui (duhul omului care este n el).
Cunoatere despre alii. mcar c n-am fost la voi cu trupul [soma], dar fiind de fa cu duhul
[pneuma]voi i duhul [pneuma] meu, fiind adunai laolalt (1 Cor 5:3-4). n timp ce distinge corporalul de
nematerial, Pavel spune c el nsui va participa n viaa bisericii, pneuma sa este prezent i activ prin
aciunea divinului pneuma, care lucreaz prin scrisoarea pe care Pavel o scrie.

Cunoaterea despre Dumnezeu. Galateni 6:18, Frailor harul Domnului nostru Isus Cristos s fie
cu duhul vostru! este tot aa de cuprinztor ca 1 Tesaloniceni 5:28, Harul Domnului nostru Isus Christos s fie
cu voi cu toi! sau, dup cum am mai putea spune, pneuma este acea dimensiune a sinelui prin care ntreaga
persoan se angreneaz n comuniune cu Dumnezeu: nsui Duhul [pneuma] adeverete mpreun cu duhul
[pneuma] nostru c suntem copii ai lui Dumnezeu; prin aciunea Duhului strigm, Ava adic: Tat! (Rom
8:16, 15). Tot aa n 1 Corinteni 5:5 (ca duhul [pneuma] s fie mntuit) nu vorbete despre nematerial pn la
excluderea corporalului (cf. 1 Cor 15) ci despre ntreaga persoan ca fiind orientat nspre Dumnezeu (Fee,
212). (Despre oscilarea n folosirea lui pneuma de ctre Pavel ntre persoane i un aspect sau o
dimensiune a persoanei n comuniune cu Dumnezeu, vezi Dunn in Kamlah et al., 693-94).
Exist un fel de cunoatere care se distinge de cognitiv. Fiindc, dac m rog n alt limb, duhul [pneuma]
meu se roag, dar mintea [nous] mea este fr rod (1 Cor 14:14). O asemenea rugciune nu este inteligibil
pentru judecat (a crei activitate este suspendat temporar), dar persoana este ntr-o comuniune sincer cu
Dumnezeu (Dac aducei laud lui Dumnezeu n duhul, 1 Cor 14:16) i este deci edificat (1 Cor 14:2, 4).
Vorbind din nou despre rugciune, Pavel afirm c pacea lui Dumnezeu, care ntrece orice pricepere [nous], v
va pzi inimile [kardiai] i gndurile [noemata] n Cristos Isus (Filip 4:7). Aceasta nu este o cunoatere
descriptiv despre pacea lui Dumnezeu (facultile lui noussunt suspendate), ci cunoaterea intim a acelei
realiti (pacea lui Dumnezeu este experimentat n inim). Pavel se roag pentru ca cretinii s cunoasc
[ginosko] dragostea lui Cristos, care ntrece orice pricepere [gnosis] (Ef 3:19).
3. Persoana n Robia Pcatului.
Pavel vorbete despre pcat (hamartia) ca fiind mai mult o putere dect o aciune. Pcatul este un tiran neruinat
care a ptruns n lumea noastr i i-a stabilit domnia prin pcatul lui Adam (Rom 5:12-21) i de atunci menine
ntreaga umanitate ntr-o robie teribil (Rom 3:9; 6:20; Gal 3:22). (Cnd hamartia va fi zugrvit de Pavel ca pe
o putere, Pcatul cu litere majuscule va fi folosit n urmtoarele).
La Pavel, la fel cu termenul echivalent i folosirea lui n Vechiul Testamnet, sarx semnaleaz neputina creaturii
(vezi 2.2 sus). Dar Pavel de asemenea ntrebuineaz sarx pentru a denota existena omului i atitudinea ca
opunere fa de, i n contradicie cu Dumnezeu cu Duhul lui Dumnezeu. (Bornkamm, 133; cf. Schweizer
and Baumgrtel, 132; Thiselton, 675-76). Sarx a jurat loialitate unei alte puteri: cu firea pmnteasc slujesc
legii Pcatului (Rom 7:25). Sarx al fiecrui om de la Adam ncoace, cu excepia Domnului Isus (Rom 8:3), a
fost stpnit i nrobit de Pcat.
Prin firea pmnteasc, Pcatul subjug ntreaga persoan. n grdina Eden cererea major a Pcatului prin
arpe, nu este dorina fizic ci raiunea uman i mndria (Gen 3:1-6); Eva este amgit prin iretenia arpelui
(2 Cor 11:3; 1 Tim 2:14). Deci, n timp ce lucrarea crnii [sarx] (Gal 5:19-21) include ceea ce noi am numi
pcate ale crnii cum ar fi imoralitatea sexual i beia, catalogul este dominat de pcate ale minii i duhului:
ur, ceart, gelozie, suprare, glcevi, nenelegeri, dezbinri i invidie (vezi Virtutes and Vices). Din nou,
prin sinecdoc Pavel folosete un termen pentru o parte a sinelui (sarx) pentru a desemna ntreaga persoan
vzut ntr-un anume fel, cu alte cuvinte n rebeliune mpotriva lui Dumnezeu i n robia puterilor ale acestui
veac ru (Gal 1:4), al crei stpn este Pcatul.
Prin urmare, nici pneuma nici nous nici kardia nu scap din strnsoarea Pcatului. Credincioii trebuie s se
purifice de orice ntinciune a crnii [sarx] i a duhului [pneuma] (2 Cor 7:1) asta nseamn corporal i
nematerial. Unde sarx se lupt mpotriva lui pneuma, sarx-ul uman este invariabil, incluznd dimensiunea sa
spiritual mpotriva divinului pneuma: cine seamn n firea pmnteasc [sarx], va secera din firea
pmnteasc putrezirea; dar cine seamn n Duhul, va secera n Duhul viaa venic (Gal 6:8; cf. 5:16-26).
Pneuma uman, departe de a oferi mntuirea, are nevoie ea nsi s fie mntuit (1 Cor 5:5; cf. Kmmel, 44).
(n Romani 8:10 pneuma denot Duhul Sfnt).
Pavel vorbete despre mintea [nous] crnii [sarx] (Col 2:18), aceasta nseamn, posedat de carne ca i
unealt a Pcatului. Poziia moral a lui nous este determinat de ceea ce l domin, sau de Duhul lui
Dumnezeu sau de carne (Guthrie, 169). Cnd eram sub stpnirea Diavolului (vezi Satan, Devil) cnd triam
n poftele firii pmnteti [sarx], cnd fceam voile firii pmnteti [sarx] i ale gndurilor noastre [dianoiai]
(Ef 2:2-3). n acest text se pare c primul sarx este mai extins dect al doilea, i c al doilea sarx i dianoiai
reprezint dou ci plcerile crnii gsesc expresia senzual i intelectual (cf. Ef 5:3-5, asemntor cu Gal 5:
22-23; Behm in Behm and Wrthwein, 966-67).
Dumnezeu a judecat pe cei care au nbuit adevrul prin accelerarea decderii lor n eroare: ei s-au dedat la

gndiri dearte, i inima [kardia] lor fr pricepere s-a ntunecat; fiindc n-au cutat s pstreze pe Dumezeu,
Dumezeu i-a lsat n voia minii [nous] lor blestemate (Rom 1:18-21,28). Prin tunecarea inimii lor fr
pricepere [asynetos] (1:21), Pavel vrea s spun c nu este doar lips de cunoatere[ci] un semn c omul n
adncul fiinei sale l respinge pe DumnezeuLipsa de discernmnt trebuie privit ca un comportament
culpabil (Goetzmann in Harder and Goetzmann, 132). Efectul mpietririi inimii este culpabil ignorana
(agnoia), o nelegere ntunecat [dianoia] i inutilitatea minii [nous] (Ef 4:17-18). n timp ce n Romani
1:14 anoetoi (necugetai) sunt cei simpli i needucai a cror putere de gndire este nedezvoltat, altundeva
la Pavel (Gal 3:1,3; Tit 2:3; 1 Tim 6:9) termenul denot hotrri religioase i morale adverse (Behm in Behm
and Wrthwein, 962). Simul cinstit i necinstit este deci tocit: pn i mintea [nous] i cugetul [syneidesis] le
sunt spurcate (Tit 1:15; cf. 1 Tim 4:2).
innd pasul cu unitatea minii i a voinei notate mai devreme (vezi 2.3 sus), un nous depravat (i o kardia
necugetat produc fiecare fel de rutate (Rom 1:18-32). Ostilitatea minii ctre Dumnezeu este legat de
lucrri rele (Col 1:21); cei a cror inimi sunt mpietrite i a cror nelegere este ntunecat probabil
svresc cu lcomie orice fel de necurie (Ef 4:18-19). Vorbirea ntre persoane despre [mini] stricate,
lipsite de adevr, inevitabil duce la invidie i lucruri de acest fel (1 Tim 6:3-5; cf. 2 Tim 3:8).
La Pavel folosirea lui soma (trup) nu-i aparine lui nsui ci unui stpn (Bornkamm, 131). Prin virtutea
creaiei, trupul aparine lui Dumnezeu dar n consecina Cderii el devine subiect al Pcatului. Trupul nu este
inerent pctos; trupul pcatului este trupul stpnit de Pcat (Rom 6:6; 5:12). O asemenea persoan de obicei
ofer pri ale trupului [lui/ei] Pcatului, ca instrumente ale ticloiei (Rom 6:13). Faptele crnii [soma]
care trebuiesc distruse sunt dedate s triasc dup felul crnii [sarx] (Rom 8:13). Trupul nu este destinat
pentru imoralitate sexual (vezi Sexuality) dar exact aa se comport ca i rob al Pcatului (1 Cor 6:12-20).
Psyche tot mai nseamn viaa natural dar o via ntr-o stare czut. Persoana natural (psychikos
anthropos) este incapabil s neleag realitile spirituale (1 Cor 2:6-16); trupul natural (soma psychikon)
este destinat pieirii (1 Cor 15:42-55).
Robia Pcatului nu ofer nici o scpare de responsabilitatea personal. Sinele nu rezist ci se supune repede
asaltului Pcatului. Prin nbuirea adevrului de ctre minte i neasculttoare a inimii Pcatul i stabilete i-i
menine autoritatea. Trupul se d pe sine nsui i ofer mdularele- n slujba Pcatului (Rom 1:32; 3:9,
19). Ca i aliat al Pcatului, (Rom 5:12-21), Moartea (vezi Life and Death) provoac dezintegrarea sinelui ntr-o
violare flagrant unirii n diversitatea magnific pe care Dumnezeu a
creat-o. n ciuda siguranei c a nu mai fi n trup [nseamn a fi] acas cu Domnul, lui Pavel i este team de o
existen far trup (2 Cor 5:1-10; vezi 1.2.4 sus). A.T.Lincoln observ c ce poate fi vzut aici nu este un
dualism antropologic ultim ci mai degrab o dualitate temporar introdus de pcat i moarte, care pn la
ridicarea harului mntuitor continu s tulbure ntreaga existen uman (Lincoln, 70).
4. Persoana ntregit.
Cristos i Duhul lucreaz s desfac i s inverseze ruina i distrugerea pe care Pacatul i Moartea le-a adus
asupra victimelor lor.
4.1. Noua Creaie. Primul om Adam a devenit o fiin vie [psychen zosan], ultimul Adam, un duh dttor de
via [pneuma zoopoioun] (1 Cor 15:45) i nu pneuma zon, duh viu (vezi Adam and Christ). Dunn
comenteaz, Contrastul este ntre om, recipientul suflrii de via care l constituie ca o fiin vie, i Cristos
dttorul de via al veacului care vine, viaa Duhului (Dunn 1980, 108). n plus, ca i primul Adam ultimul
Adam este o fiin atotcuprinztoare, un loc pentru o nou via (1 Cor 15:12-22, 48-49). Sinele vechi
(palaios anthropos) (Rom 6:6) umanitatea n Adam (Rom 15:12-21 este crucificat pentru ca oamenii s fie unii
cu Cristosul cel nviat (Rom 6:4-11). A-i pune noua umanitate trebuie s se mbrace n Cristos nsui (Rom
13:14; Gal 3:27). Noua umanitate [kainon anthropos] din Efeseni 2:15 este Cristosul corporal Cristos nsui
mpreun cu toi cei unii cu El n moarte i nviere. Pe aceast realitate este fondat imperativul etic: s v
dezbrcai de omul cel vechi [palaion anthropon], care se stric dup poftele neltoare, i s v mbrcai
n omul cel nou [kainon anthropon], fcut dup chipul lui Dumnezeu, n dreptatea i sfinenia adevrului (Ef
4:22-24; cf. Col 3:9-10).
Pentru a fi neles n acelai fel, dup prerea mea omul din luntru (ho eso anthropos) (Ef 3:16): aceast fraz
identific persoana n Cristos, n contrast cu natura exterioar, persoana n Adam i destinat pieirii. Chiar
dac omul nostru din afar [exo anthropos] se deterioreaz, totui cel dinuntru [eso] se noiete din zi n zi (2
Cor 4:16), anticipnd ntreaga realizare a noii umaniti n gloria cereasc

( 2 Cor 4:17-18: vezi Creation and New Creation). Prin acelai simbol omul dinuntru din Romani 7:22 este
echivalent cu noul sine implicat n Romani 6:6 (pentru aceast nelegere a omului dinluntru, vezi Barrett,
145-47; Dunn 1988, 394; Kim, 321-26). Alii (ex. Gundry, 135-40) folosesc sinele interior i exterior (ca fiind
distinct de sinele vechi i nou) pentru a denota aspectele nemateriale respectiv pe cele corporale.
4.2. Renoirea Persoanei. Persoana unit cu Cristos este transformat ntr-o fiin ntreag.
Moartea Pcatului (Rom 6:1-14) cauzeaz moartea crnii (Rom 8:1-17); vezi Dying and Rising). Pavel nu
vorbete niciodat despre scrierea lui sarx ci numai despre distrugerea lui. 1 Cor 5:5 nu vorbete neaparat despre
o moarte fizic a omului incestuos ci despre sfritul rebeliunii lui mpotriva lui Dumnezeu dup cum n
Galateni 5:24 Pavel cere rstignirea firii pctoase cu patimile i poftele ei (cf. Fee, 212; vezi Disciplina).
Legile i nvturile umane nu mpiedic ci ncurajeaz sarx-ul (Col 2:23). Puterea Duhului Sfnt este
esenial pentru nvingerea firii (Gal 5:22-26; Rom 8:1-17). Pavel dorete ca oamenii carnali, fireti (sarkinoi,
sarkikoi) care sunt vulnerabili fa de sarx ca i agent al Pcatului, s devin oameni spirituali (pneumatikoi)
dominai de Duhul, agentul lui Cristos ( 1 Cor 2:14-3:3). Unde Noul Testament difer de psihologia
comportamental este peste realitatea actual a lucrrii Duhului (Right in Brown et al., 568).
Deoarece kardia este centrul de integrare al persoanei, renoirea se face din inim nspre exterior. Dumnezeu
face ca lumina Evangheliei gloriei lui Cristos s strluceasc n inimile noastre ( 2 Cor 4:4-6). Aici este locul
unde Cristos locuiete (Ef 3:17), aici pacea Lui mprete (Col 3:15) i tot aici cretinii sunt luminai despre
scopul mntuitor al lui Dumnezeu (Ef 1:18). Inima este cea care primete Duhul Sfnt ( 2 Cor 1:22), n inim
Dumnezeu i toarn dragostea prin Duhul (Rom 5:5) i dintr-o inim curat vin faptele dragostei ( 1 Tim
1:5). ntr-un mod asemntor Cristos este cel care explic afeciunea (splanchna) lui Pavel pentru oamenii si
(Fil 1:8; Kster,556). Corespunznd adncimii angajamentului din trecut fa de Pcat, cretinii cred Evanghelia
n inim (Rom 10:9-10) i mplinesc nvtura apostolic din toat inima (Rom 6:17).
Ca i parte a aceluiai proces credincioii sunt transformai prin renoirea minii [nous] pentru descoperirea
voii bune, plcut i desvrit a lui Dumnezeu, i pentru ntrebuinarea darurilor sale n biseric (Rom 12:28; cf. Col 1:9-10). Oamenii odat nelai de nelepciunea veacului acestuia le este dat nelepciunea lui
Dumnezeu pentru nelegerea (chiar dac numai parial) a persoanei i lucrrii lui Cristos, i scopul mntuitor
al lui Dumnezeu pentru umanitate i creaie (1 Cor 1:18-2:16; Col 1:15-2:5; Ef 1:8-19). n locul mentalitii
inutile i a nelegerii ntunecate care au marcat existena lui Adam, persoanele ncorporate n Cristos sunt
renoii n duhul minii [lor] pentru a crete n adevrata dreptate i sfinenie (Ef 4:17-24). Legea minii
mele (Rom 7:23) este Legea lui Dumnezeu, la care mintea, de acum eliberat i d n ntregime aprobarea
(vezi 4.3 jos); atitudinea minii mprit de Duhul este capabil i voitoare s asculte de Legea lui Dumnezeu,
i s reziste asalturilor crnii (Rom 8:1-17).
Soma (trupul) prezent al credinciosului este muritor. Dumnezeu va distruge mncarea pe care o primete
stomacul, i stomacul nsui ( 1 Cor 6:13), pentru c trupul acesta aparine unei ordini pieritoare (1Cor 7:29-31;
15:42-44). Dar soma nsi este destinat pentru nviere (1 Cor 6:13-14; 15:20-23). La sfrit cele perisabile
(striccioase) vor fi mbrcate cu cele neperisabile (nestriccioase), iar trupul deczut al credinciosului va fi
transformat ntr-un trup de slav ca al lui Isus ( 1 Cor 15:42-52; Filip 3:20-21). Dar acest trup perisabil a fost
rscumprat de Isus i acum este chemat la slujire ( 1 Cor 6:12-20; Rom 6:11-23; 12:1). Mortalitatea trupului nu
ofer nici cea mai mic scuz pentru rsfarea poftelor sau oferirea acestora directivelor Pcatului.
Dat fiind unitatea sinelui n diversitate, experienele lui psyche i ale pneuma sunt ataate de cele ale lui soma.
Psyche tot mai denot viaa natural n ordinea prezent a existenei. Credinciosul nu mai este o persoan
natural (psychikos anthropos) ci spiritual (pneumatikos) ( 1 Cor 2:14-15); dar credinciosul pstreaz un
trup natura (soma psychikon), un alt nume pentru trupul muritor, coruptibil (1 Cor 15: 42-44). Psyche va
avea parte de transformare la sfrit (1 Tes 5:23). Pn atunci psyche nu este mai vulnerabil dect soma la
pericolele deteriorrii ordinii i la ispitele veacului acestuia. Dar la fel ca i cu trupul, aceast via este
chemat de Cristos n slujba Sa: Orice facei, s facei din toat inima [psyche], ca pentru Domnul, nu ca
pentru oameni (Col 3:23); ca nite robi ai lui Cristos, fcnd din inim [psyche] voia lui Dumnezeu (Ef 6:6);
eram gata s v dm viaa noastr [psychai] att de scumpi ne ajunseseri (1 Tes 2:8). Prin acelai
simbol dublu uman (pneuma) este destinat pentru mntuirea final (1 Cor 5:5;
1 Tess 5:23); poate nc experimenta pngrirea pcatului (2 Cor 7:1); poate deja experimenta o comuniune
profund cu Dumnezeu prin Duhul (Rom 8:16; 1 Cor 14:2, 14-15); i este, mpreun cu trupul, devotat n
slujirea lui Dumnezeu (1 Cor 7:34).

Deja am observat c robia Pcatului, departe de a permite scparea de responsabilitile personale, vine prin
cedarea voinei sinelui la cererea Pcatulu. Acelai lucru se adeverete (mutatis mutandis) pentru robii lui
Cristos. Problema deciziilor etice; credincioii vor rspunde pentru ei nii n ziua judecii
(1 Cor 3: 12-15; 2 Cor 5:10). Mai mult, dup cum Pcatul a exploatat unitatea sinelui n diversitate, tot aa i
Cristos cheam pentru dedicarea ntregii persoane la o via de ascultare. Dovada cunoaterii i adncimea
discernmntului este conduita cinstit (Filip 1:9-11; cf. Col 1:9-11).
4.3. Sinele Divizat. n cele din urm ne ntoarcem la Romani 7:14-25, un pasaj crucial pentru psihologia
paulin, i firete pentru ntreaga teologie a lui Pavel. Vom argumenta c aceste versete descriu lupta cretin,
una care este exclusiv cretin, i una n care Pavel i reprezint pe cretini n general. (Pentru o defens recent
a acestui punct de vedere vezi Dunn 1988, 387-99, 403-12; pentru alte puncte de vedere, vezi Moo, 448-98).
4.3.1. Dou Perspective ale Sinelui. Dintr-un anumit punct de vedere sinele este o fiin carnal. Cuvintele
adic n firea mea pmnteasc (Rom 7:18) servesc mai degrab pentru a defini dect a limita Eu aa cum
este conceput aici. Tot aa ar mai trebui s nelegem Romani 7:14. Din punct de vedere al participrii cuiva n
Adam (Rom 5:12-21) i vulnerabilitatea continu a cuiva fa de agenii Pcatului eu ca i cretin este nc tot
carnal (sarkinos) nc sub puterea pcatului (cf. 1 Cor 3:1). n spatele cuvintelor vndut pcatului (Rom 7:14)
st participiul perfect pepromenos [vndut], denotnd o condiie care a nceput nainte de convertire i trece n
experiena cretin. Dintr-un alt punct de vedere sinele este renoit. n aezarea legii minii [nous] mele
mpotriva legea pcatului care este n mdularele mele (Rom 7:23), Pavel nu descrie conflictul ntre dou
segmente ale sinelui. Mai degrab mintea mea desemneaz ntreaga persoan ca fiind renoit de Cristos i de
Duhul, i mdularele mele ntreaga persoan ca fiind ameninat de robia pcatului (Rom 7:25). Omul din
luntru (Rom 7:22) este sinele n Cristos ceva ce Pavel numete altundeva noul sine (omul nou) (vezi 4.1
sus); legea minii mele (Rom 7:23) este Legea lui Dumnezeu, la care persoana, de acuma renoit de Cristos,
se supune (Rom 8:1-8). Necredinciosul fcnd tot aa este afectat ntr-un mod contrar de folosirea legii de ctre
pcat, sau de motivele perverse ale cuiva (Rom 10:3). Dar pe cnd nous capitula naintea folosirii legii ntrun
mod seductor de ctre pcat (Rom 7:7-11; Gal 3:22-23), de acuma se mpotrivete (Rom 7:23). Pavel, cretinul
tie ce face, i nelege ce face (Rom 7:15) i de ce (Rom 7:17-18). ns el nu accept legitimitatea a ceea ce
face. Chiar i cnd cedeaz dictaturii pcatului, el respinge i detest ceea ce face, el recunoate c cererile
Pcatului sunt nelegitime (Rom 6).
4.3.2. Dou Tipuri de Robie. Un slujitor (diakonos) poate sluji la mai muli stpni, dar un rob (doulos) nu poate
(Mt 6:24). Dar lund n considerare Romani 7:25: astfel, deci, cu mintea, eu [autos ego] slujesc [douleo] legii
lui Dumnezeu, dar cu firea pctoas slujesc legii pcatului. Eu nsumi le face pe amndou, douleo
stpnete ambele pri ale propoziiei. Explicaia este c Eu nsumi particip n dou umaniti (reprezentate
de Adam i respectiv de Cristos) i n dou realiti ( veacul acesta ru i veacul viitor care are s vin). Eu sunt
capabil de a m dedica n totalitate fiecreia, nu ntr-un mod alternativ ci simultan. Aceast interpretare este
susinut de ordinul clauzei n Romani 7:24-25. Prima dat vine plnsul o, nenorocitul de mine! (Rom 7:24a)
i n sfrt necunoaterea divizrii n adncime a sinelui (Rom 7:25b) ntre ele st ntrebarea cine m va scpa
de acest trup de moarte? (Rom 7:24b) i exclamarea mulumesc lui Dumnezeu, prin Isus Cristos, Domnul
nostru! (Rom 7:25a). Aceast referire semnificativ i negreit la experiena cretin este integrat discuiei
prezente, i nu anexat ei. Plngerea din Romani 7:24 este relatat ntr-un mod mai cumptat n Romani 7:25b.
Verbul din Romani 7:24 (rhysetai) este un viitor adevrat: Isus Cristos m va rscumpra din acest trup de
moarte la nvierea morilor (Rom 6:5-8; 8:10-11). Nu este doar o lupt mpotriva pcatului (Rom 7:25b) care
explic suferina (Rom 7:24a). A fi gustat deja mntuirea creaz o dorin care nu este satisfcut pe deplin
pn cnd nu nc devine o realitate (Rom 8:18-25; 13:11-14). Sigurana unei scpri eventuale previne ca
suferina s degenereze n disperare, i divizia n sine arat c pcatul este respins cu eficacitate n anticiparea
victoriei finale (vezi Eschatology).
tradus din Dictionary of Paul and his Letters , (pag. 765-775)
Editors: Gerald F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin, Daniel G. Reid
A compendium of contemporary biblical scolarship
Not: Textele biblice au fost traduse folosind versiunea Cornilescu i Biblia Triunghi

INTRUPAREA CUVANTULUI
(Ioan 1:14)
Si Cuvantul s-a facut trup si a locuit printre noi, plin de har si de adevar. Si
i noi am privit slava Lui, o slava intocmai ca slava singurului nascut din Tatal.
O RECAPITULARE A STUDIULUI ANTERIOR:
- "RESPINGEREA SI PRIMIREA LUI ISUS HRISTOS" (Ioan 1:6-13)
- Ioan Botezatorul, Un martor al Luminii (6-9)
- Tragedia respingerii lui Isus Hristos (10-11)
- Conditia numirii noastre, "copii ai lui Dumnezeu" (12): prin a-l primi pe Isus
- Cine ne da DREPTUL de a ne numi asa? Sau ce da dreptul unui om sa se numeasca asa (13). Vedem ca Ioan
nu porneste de la premiza ca toti sunt copii ai lui Dumnezeu, din vreun motiv sau altul. Biblia se opune acestei
idei preconcepute, cum am vazut in Mat.3 si Ioan 8. Dumnezeu se opune iluziilor in acest sens. Poti insa sa ai
acest drept! Primeste-l pe El!
- Dovezi interne ale nasterii din nou.
INTRODUCERE:
Acum Ioan ne initiaza intr-un alt mister al Dumnezeirii. Uniunea celor doua naturi intr-una singura. Pana acum
ne-a furnizat o bogatie de argumente/dovezi in favoarea DUMNEZEIRII Cuvantului (era la inceput, a creat, este
viata oamenilor, lumina lor, etc.) dar acum ne prezinta UMANITATEA Lui. Iata cum se formuleaza cele doua
crezuri fundamentale ale Bisericii Crestine: Isus este cu adevarat Dumnezeu si este om cu adevarat. El este om
cu desavarsire si este cu desavarsire, Dumnezeu. Cum aceste doua naturi (realitati) se combina intr-una singura
ramane inca misterios, dar aceasta nu ar trebui sa ne retina de la a cerceta incarnarea Lui, in detaliu, pe cat
posibil intr-un singur studiu, fiindca numai in incarnare se realizeaza acest miracol nemaiauzit. Nu putem
neglija aceasta sarcina, deoarece asa cum ne-a demonstreaza istoria, altii vor incerca sa o explice in feluri care
conduc la confuzie si eroare. Studiind intruparea lui Isus, studiem din nou Persoana Sa si intentia noastra ar
trebui sa fie sa-l stim cat mai bine. Sa cunoastem cat ne spune ca se poate cunoaste despre El aceasta carte:
Biblia. Gresind in domeniul "cristologiei", un om chiar daca are conceptii corecte in oricare alt domeniu biblic,
nu poate fi un crestin pentru ca pur si simplu nu-l cunoaste pe adevaratul Hristos si crede o doctrina a unuia
fals!
EXPLICATII ALTERNATIVE ALE INCARNARII
EBIONISM - separa dumnezeirea de Persoana umana a lui Isus - doar un om!
DOCETISM - parea om, dar nu era in realitate om. Separatia dintre umanitate si dumnezeire GNOSTICISM Isus avea un trup dintr-o substanta spirituala nu din materie. (o fantoma!). Cele doua elemente, uman sI divin nu
se aflau in Persoana Lui. Separarea atat a dumnezeirii cat si a umanitatii..
ARIANISM - Arius, prezbiter al Bisericii din Alexandria (trait 256-336).Fiul a fost creat!? Apartinea creatiei nu
dumnezeirii!
Explicatii gresite ale felului in care cele doua elemente, uman si divin s-au combinat in Persoana Sa:
APOLINARIANISM - (310-390 AD) Apolinarius, suporter entuziast al lui Atanasie...La incarnare, Dumnezeu
Fiul ...locuinta intr-un trup omenesc, in locul sufletului omenesc. Nu poseda o natura umana completa: tendinta
docetica.
NESTORIANISM - Nestorius, in 428 Arhiepiscopul Constantinopolelui. Dorind sa conserve umanitatea lui Isus
a sustinut separarea celeor doua naturi in Persoana lui Hristos, punand la indoiala unitatea Persoanei Lui.
Zadarnicea incarnarea sI periclita mantuirea! In 431, inlaturat din post si devine un zelos misionar.
EUTICHIANISM - Eutichius, oponent inversunat al nestorianismului, a sustinut cu tarie unitatea Persoanei lui
Hristos, incat acesta sa fie in loc de doua naturi diferite o singura natura compusa. Un fel de a treia fiinta
amalgamata, nici om cu adevarat si nici Dumnezeu cu adevarat! Condamnat la Sinodul de la Constantinopole in
448 dar reabilitat, (dubios) in Efes in 449.
Pe vremea aceea...EBIONISM, DOCETISM, GNOSTICISM, ARIANISM, APOLINARIANISM,
NESTORIANISM, EUTICHIANISM....Astazi?
Fiindca nu se mai putea continua asa in 451 d.H. se intruneste Conciliul de la Calcedon pentru a pune capat
disputelor. Acolo s-au formulat expresiile care constituie bazele oricarei declaratii ortodoxe de credinta cu
privire la Persoana lui Hristos, de atunci incoace. Formula de baza ar suna, din engleza, cam asa:
"...noi marturisim ca Domnul nostru Isus Hristos este unul si acelasi Fiu...perfect in Dumnezeirea Lui...perfect

in Umanitatea Lui...avand o singura faptura cu Tatal (homoousios) in Dumnezeire, homousios (de aceasi)
faptura cu noi...aratat in doua naturi (physeis), fara confuzie, fara schimbare, fara diviziune si fara
separare...proprietatea fiecarei naturi fiindu-i pastrata si fiind concurenta intr-o singura persoana (prosopon) si
intr-o singura existenta (hypostasis).
Aceasta este Intruparea: uniunea intr-o singura persoana (hypostasis), a unei naturi complet umane si a uneia
complet divine. La Calcedon, Biserica a exprimat aceasta uniune: cele doua naturi devin una in unica
existenta/faptura a lui Isus Hristos. Aceasta formula straveche afirma ca desi in uniunea hipostatica fiecare din
aceste naturi si-au pastrat proprietatile esentiale, a existat totusi o comuniune veritabila intre cele doua naturi
astfel incat proprietatile uneia i-au fost comunicate celeilalte.
1 Tim.3:16
"Si fara indoiala, mare este taina evlaviei (religiei noastre)...cel ce-a fost aratat in trup, a fost dovedit neprihanit
in Duhul, a fost vazut de ingeri, a fost propovaduit printre Neamuri, a fost crezut in lume, a fost inaltat in
slava!"
DUPA UNII, INTRUPAREA UN MIT...
O IDEE NOUA
Cuvantul folosit in greceste pentru "am vazut" este "theasthai". Este utilizat de foarte multe ori in NT cu referire
la vederea fizica propriu-zisa. Prin aceasta Ioan ne spune ca acest Cuvant a venit pe pamant in forma unui om si
a fost vazut de ochi omenesti. E ca si cum el ar spune: "Daca vreti sa vedeti acel cuvant creator, cum este el,
atunci priviti la Isus din Nazaret".
*Acesta este saltul in gandirea oamenilor pe care intruparea lui Isus Hristos l-a facut. Pentru lumea greaca acest
lucru era de neconceput fiindca la ei Dumnezeu nu s-a atins de creatie, iar aici Ioan spune ca Dumnezeu s-a
intrupat! Dumnezeul distant de creatie, sa ia forma unui om? Ce spune Ioan e prea mult pentru filozofia greaca a
vremii, dar este ceea ce Isus a fost si inseamna pentru el!
TRUPUL O TEMNITA? O MISIUNE DE SALVARE FOARTE DEOSEBITA
Pentru greci trupul era o temnita in care spiritul era inchis. Sa le spui ca Dumnezeu de bunavoie a venit intr-un
trup era o idee socanta pentru ei.
- Filozoful grec Philo din Alexandria a spus ca, "Dumnezeu nu s-a coborat la noi si nici nu a ajuns sa depinda de
necesatatile trupului".
- Marele imparat roman, stoicul Marc Aureliu isi exprima dispretul sau fata de trup in comparatie cu spiritul.
"Dispretuiti trupul, carnea si oasele, reteaua complicata de nervi, vene si artere - alcatuirea trupului supusa
putrezirii", spunea el.
- Mai tarziu, sfantul Augustin spunea ca inainte de convertirea lui i-a citit si i-a studiat pe marii filozofi pagani
ai vremii dar de la nici unul nu a putut sa auda asa ceva: si anume ca Dumnezeu creatorul tuturor lucrurilor a
luat trupul unei fiinte facute de El pentru indeplinirea planului Sau mantuitor. Trebuie sa recunoastem ca este
INGENIOS! Sa ia trupul uneia dintre creaturile pe care vrea sa le salveze? Asta, misiune de salvare!
Aceasta este implinirea vremii care a venit despre care Pavel vorbeste in Gal.4:4, cand "Dumnezeu a trimis pe
Fiul Sau, nascut din femeie, nascut sub Lege, ca sa rascumpere pe cei ce erau sub Lege, pentru ca sa capatam
infierea". Atunci Dumnezeu a ales sa treaca la implinirea planului Sau de mantuire. Prima actiune din aceasta
misiune de salvare a fost intruparea Cuvantului Sau.
Aceasta este minunea si surpriza ideii si actului intruparii: ca Dumnezeu putea si devenea trup; ca Dumnezeu
intra in aceasta viata pe care noi oamenii o traim limitandu-se in timp si spatiu pentru ca ochii oamenilor sa-l
poata vedea si sa nu moara. (doar asa puteau sa-l "vada"!). Creatorul aparea in mijlocul creatiei Sale intr-un fel
in care aceasta sa-l poata vedea si cunoaste. De aceea aproape de incheierea acestei misiuni El a putut spune cu
satisfactie: "Am facut cunoscut numele Tau, oamenilor pe care Mi i-ai dat din lume" (Ioan 17:6) fiindca intrupat
a putut face acest lucru cu succes.
RENUMELE PROST AL CARNII
Tocmai pe vremea cand firea pamantesca isi facuse un renume prost, lui Dumnezeu ii vine ideea de a-l trimite
pe Fiul Sau intr-o fire asemanatoare cu cea a pacatului. Sa se supuna limitarilor ei si slabiciunilor ei.
* Intruparea a fost si mai uluitoare daca privim la cuvantul folosit de Ioan pentru a descrie intruparea sau
venirea in trup: "sarx". Acesta este cuvantul folosit de nenumarate ori de Pavel pentru a descrie "carnea" sau
"firea pamanteasca". Ideea ca Logosul a imbracat firea pamanteasca (natura umana) cu toate slabiciunile ei era
scandaloasa. A aplica aceasta idee lui Dumnezeu era ceva la care mintile lor reactionau cu oroare. Din aceasta

cauza s-a nascut in biserica grupul DOCETIST ("dokein" - a parea). In prima sa epistola Ioan se adreseaza si
mai direct acestui grup: 1 Ioan 4:1....
"Preaiubitilor sa nu dati crezare oricarui duh, ci sa cercetati duhurile daca sunt de la Dumnezeu, caci in lume au
iesit multi prorooci mincinosi. Duhul lui Dumnezeu sa-l cunoasteti dupa acesta: Orice duh care marturiseste ca
Isus Hristos a venit in trup este de la Dumnezeu si orice duh care nu marturiseste pe Isus, nu este de la
Dumnezeu, ci este duhul lui Antihrist... "
Pentru Ioan aceasta era o negare a adevarului Evangheliei. Isus a fost pe deplin Dumnezeu dar a fost si om pe
de-a intregul. A posedat natura divina dar aici vedem ca a imbracat-o si pe cea umana. E bine sa conservam
neatinsa ideea dumnezeirii lui Isus Hristos dar sa nu uitam ca el s-a facut trup, pentru a plati in locul nostru pe
cruce si a realiza mantuirea noastra! In intruparea lui Isus il vedem pe Cel Atotputernic venind in ajutorul celor
neputinciosi, traind o viata ca a lor, dar pe placul Lui, ca si noi de atunci incolo sa facem la fel.
PRIN INTRUPARE ISUS IMPLINESTE SCOPUL MANTUITOR AL LUI DUMNEZEU
Ca prin intrupare Isus implineste scopul mantuitor al lui Dumnezeu Scriptura ne-o aminteste de mai multe ori:
* in Evrei 2:14: "Astfel dar, deoarece copiii sunt partasi sangelui si carnii, tot asa si El Insusi a fost deopotriva
partas la ele, pentru ca prin moarte sa nimiceasca pe cel ce are puterea mortii, adica pe diavolul"
* Evrei 10:5 "...caci este cu neputinta ca sangele taurilor si al tapilor sa stearga pacatele. De aceea, cand El intra
in lume, El zice: "Tu n-ai voit nici jertfa, nici prinos; ci Mi-ai pregatit un trup; n-ai primit nici arderi de tot, nici
jertfe pentru pacat". Atunci am zis: "Iata-ma (in sulul cartii este scris despre Mine), vin sa fac voia Ta,
Dumnezeule!"
* 1 Ioan 4:2 "Isus Hristos a venit in trup"
* in 1 Tim.3:16 Isus este numit "cel ce-a fost aratat in trup"
Pentru a intelege mai bine in ce "s-a bagat" Isus prin intruparea Sa, sa privim la,...
LIMITARILE FIINTEI OMENESTI
"Ce este omul?" a fost intrebarea din mintea lui David, psalmistul (Ps.8). Dar sa ne intrebam si noi ce-a devenit
Isus prin a se intrupa/incarna?
Din punct de vedere biologic, omul este un mamifer vertebrat. Din ordinul primatelor. Din clasa: homo. De
specia: sapiens. Corpul sau este alcatuit din organe. tesuturi, celule si protoplasma.
Din punct de vedere chimic, omul este alcatuit in cea mai mare parte din apa, dintr-o cantitate apreciabila de
carbon, din diferite cantitati de fier, calciu, magneziu, fosfor, sulf, si saruri minerale.
Din punct de vedere psihic, are capacitati intelectuale si emotionale, vointa si diverse instincte. Poate uneori sa
alerge foarte repede si sa sfideze pentru putin forta gravitationala sarind in sus. Cu bratele poate realiza diferite
alte forme dar toate lipsite de viata. Este limitat de timp, spatiu si materie. Viata pe care o are este extrem de
fragila si este chinuit de o multime de boli. De asemenea, psihic vorbind este bantuit de o multime de probleme
si de griji care-i pot rapi somnul sau il pot face ineficient. Are vise si aspiratii, din care foarte putine si rareori se
implinesc in timpul scurtei sale existente. Acesta este, pe scurt omul.
Acum sa ne gandim ca toate acestea au devenit parte a fiintei Domnului Isus Hristos. Destul de socant, da? Ce
ne spun acestea despre EL?
* Noi avem un Mantuitor care a trait ce traim noi, a suferit ce suferim noi, a plans pentru ceea ce noi plangem, a
mancat ce mancam si noi, care a trait ca un om in adevaratul sens al cuvantului! De aceea, venind la El atunci
cand gresim nu reactioneaza scarbit si dezgustat de ceea ce noi am facut. Nu poate fi luat prin surprindere de
prostiile nostre si nu raspunde iritat. Cand el a fost taiat, a sangerat, cand a fost trist a plans, cand i-a fost foame
stomacul l-a durut, cand i-a fost frig a tremurat, cand inima I s-a oprit a murit.
Fiindca a fost om, a simtit slabiciunea noastra, dar fara a ceda pacatului. A rezistat dezlantuirii ispitei impotriva
Lui.
DE CE S-A INTRUPAT HRISTOS? CE VREA DUMNEZEU PRIN INTRUPAREA LUI?
EX. ILUSTRATIA "soldatului de plumb" a lui C.S.Lewis din cartea lui "Crestinismul redus la esente", pag.124126. Splendida ilustratie!
Atunci putem sa ne intrebam, De ce s-a intrupat Hristos?
*- pentru ca sa ne mantuiasca (!) dar mai pentru ce?
*- pentru ca viata lui Dumnezeu sa fie in noi. ("La creatie Domnul l-a facut pe om asemenea Lui. La intrupare,
El s-a facut asemenea omului" (John Boys) Putem spune in continuare, pentru ca omul sa fie facut spiritual ca
El. Asemenea lui. Sa fie facut partas al firii dumnezeiesti (Vezi 2 Petru 1:4). Si,

*- pentru ca Dumnezeu sa traiasca prin noi, nestanjenit. (ptr. a muri trupeste, a invia trupeste!)
CITATE:
"Fiindca Hristos este om, el poate ispasi pentru el si poate simti impreuna cu el. Fiindca Hristos este Dumnezeu
ispasirea savarsita de El are valoare absoluta iar unirea omului cu Dumnezeu pe care astfel o realizeaza este
desavarsita" (John Blanchard ?)
"El a luat chipul unui rob in timp ce a pastrat chipul lui Dumnezeu (in Filip.2, nu se spune ca a renuntat la
acesta). Este exact ceea ce face posibila mantuirea noastra si o realizeaza" (William Hendricksen)
MIRACOLUL INCARNARII
Incarnarea este cea ce C.S.Lewis numeste "Marele Miracol" al Crestinismului. Este capitolul central al dramei
mantuirii. Iata cum il descrie el:
"Povestea incarnarii este o poveste a coborarii si a inaltarii...Ma gandesc la aceasta intreaga idee a coborarii jos,
jos de tot apoi a inaltarii sus, sus de tot. Ma gandesc la coborarea nu doar la umanitate ci la acele noua luni care
preced nasterea umana...si apoi la coborarea si mai jos in moartea trupului. Cineva se poate gandi la imaginea
unui scufundator, care se dezbraca de haina dupa haina, dezgolindu-se, apoi pentru o clipa zvacnind in aer
urmand plonjonul prin apa verzuie, calda si luminata de razele soarelui pana la apa rece si intunecata din adanc,
la noroiul si mizeria de pe fundul marii, dar urcand din nou, cu plamanii goliti de aer la apa calda si luminoasa
ajungand in cele din urma in stralucirea soarelui si tinand triumfator in mana lucrul pentru care a sarit in apa.
Acest lucru este natura umana, insa pe langa acesta si intreaga creatie, noul univers".
SEMNIFICATIA INTRUPARII (Charles R.Swindoll)
"Plonjonul" in umanitate prin intrupare ne sugereaza rascumpararea. Coborarea unui Dumnezeu sfant, singurul
Dumnezeu adevarat la conditia unor fiinte instrainate de el si dusmanoase Lui. Inseamna recuperarea naturii
umane ce a cazut in degradarea pacatului. Inseamna in cei mai simpli termeni, uniunea dintre Dumnezeu si
umanitate in persoana lui Isus Hristos. Uniunea aceasta a avut loc in clipa zamislirii din fecioara cand cele doua
naturi s-au intalnit miraculos, devenind inseparabile dar totusi neamestecate (vezi Luca 1:31-35). In aceasta
unire misterioasa, o dumnezeire nestirbita s-a investmantat intr-o umanitate pura. Coegal, coetern si coexistent
impreuna cu Tatal, Isus era cu desavarsire Dumnezeu si cu desavarsire om! La intrupare, Dumnezeu a "plonjat"
in intunericul in care zacea creatia Lui si a devenit un om. (pentru a-l reface pe om sa fie om).
"La inceput era Cuvantul si Cuvantul era cu Dumnezeu si Cuvantul era Dumnezeu...Si Cuvantul s-a facut trup si
a locuit printre noi, plin de har si de adevar. Si noi am privit slava lui, o slava intocmai ca slava singurului
nascut din Tatal" (Ioan 1:1, 14)
MANUALUL SALVATORULUI?!
Despre noi, oamenii, de exemplu ecologistii spun ca putem fi salvatorii altor specii. Dar...
Noi, "salvatorii" altor specii? Noi, care nu ne putem salva pe noi insine? Daca ar fi sa se scrie o carte,
"Manualul Salvatorului" cred ca principiul de baza ar trebui sa fie, pentru a salva trebuie sa devii ceea ce vrei sa
salvezi. De aceea, salvatorii mineri cred ca sunt cei mai aproape de adevar. Ca sa salveze mineri, ei insisi
trebuie sa fie mineri. Si inca dintre cei mai buni. Sa intre in mina si sa o cunoasca bine!
De ce ecologistii care vor sa salveze, de exemplu, o specie de broaste pe cale de disparitie nu pot sa o faca? In
primul rand, nu devin broaste si nu cred ca le-ar place sa devina!
O DOCTRINA APLICABILA Doctrina intruparii lui Dumnezeu in persoana lui Isus din Nazaret nu este o
doctrina moarta, care nu se poate aplica. Doctrina uniunii celor doua naturi, umana si divina in incarnarea lui
Isus nu inseamna oare ca: ?
Fiindca este Dumnezeu, el are dreptul si poate ierta pacatele (Marcu 2:7).
Fiindca este om, poate intelege slabiciunile omenesti si poate ajuta (Evrei 2:17; 4:15)
Fiindca este si Dumnezeu si Om, este singurul mijlocitor adecvat intre Dumnezeu si om (Gal.3:20; 1 Tim.2:5)
De aceea, Lui sa-i cerem iertare.
El e Dumnezeu. Lui sa-i cerem ajutor; a trait ca om, intelege si ne poate ajuta.
Sa venim la El, ca om doar El ne aduce in prezenta lui Dumnezeu!
CONCLUZIE: Trupurile noastre din instrumente, unelte ale pacatului, devin trupuri ale vietii!
De aceea, amintiti-va de exclamatia de disperare a lui Pavel, din Romani 7: 24, "O nenorocitul de mine cine ma
va salva din acest trup de moarte?" Pavel se vede condamnat de lege si de pacatosenia lui. Fara speranta si fara
sansa. Insa in intruparea lui Isus vedem raspunsul la marea deznadejde a lui Pavel. Intr-un trup ca al lui (Pavel),
Isus a condamnat moartea si a distrus puterea pacatului. Acest trup poate acum deveni un trup al vietii, fiindca

Isus a venit in trup.

OPERA CAMELOT
In piesa de opera Camelot, regele Arthur descopera infidelitatea reginei Guinevere cu Lancelot, cel mai de
incredere cavaler al regelui. Dupa lege ea era considerata vinovata si condamnata la arderea pe rug. Regele
Arthur se vede prins intre dragostea lui pentru regina lui si responsabilitatea lui fata de lege. Mordred, fiul
nelegitim al regelui, da glas situatiei disperate in care se afla regele.
"Arthur, ce dilema magnifica! Las-o sa moara si se va termina cu tine! Daca vrei insa, las-o sa traiasca si vei fi
un nelegiuit! Ce vei face, Arthure? O vei ucide pe regina sau ucizi legea?"
Cu lacrimi in ochi, Regele Arthur apare la fereastra castelului pentru a urmari executia. Calaul asteapta semnul
din partea regelui pentru a aprinde rugul pe care se afla regina lui. In durerea lui, insa acesta intarzie.
"Nu pot! Nu pot! NU pot sa o las sa moara!" La care Mordred, dispretuitor ii raspunde: "Esti om la urma urmei,
nu? Slab si neputincios!"
Spre deosebire de Regele Arthur, Isus nu este "slab si neputincios". El este om dar este si Dumnezeu. El isi lasa
regatul Sau ceresc cum ne spune Filipeni 2:5-7, ia chipul unui om si moare in locul nostru, cei condamnati de
lege pentru infidelitate la arderea pe rug. El este acel Rege care a avut puterea renuntarii la toate onorurile si
placerile unui rege si sa ia locul miresei Sale (2 Cor.8:9). Facand aceasta, El a satisfacut atat cerinta legii
necrutatoare cat si a dragostei divine! Si nu s-a oprit aici. Dupa cea platit in locul reginei Sale, a inviat si ii
pregateste un loc mai frumos unde intr-o buna zi, o va duce!
APLICA!
Imagineaza-te pe tine insuti in locul acelei infidele tradatoare. Si suntem. Ne-am tradat menirea noastra de fiinte
facute dupa chipul si asemanarea Lui pentru a fi ai Lui. L-am parasit si am trait dupa placerea noastra. Legea lui
ne-a ajuns din urma si acum ne vedem condamnati de ea. Ne aflam la stalpul infamiei inaintea unui intreg
univers care ne priveste cu dispret. Ne meritam pedeapsa si totul atarna de un gest! Dar culmea, cel de la care se
asteapta gestul aprobator al executiei noastre, se coboara din Palatul lui si se pune in locul nostru platind pentru
pacatele altora! Ce altceva ai putea face la acest gest decat sa cazi la pamant si sa-l numesti Domnul si
Mantuitorul tau?
SCENA INTRUPARII
Cea mai frumoasa si miscatoare scena a intruparii o avem in Filipeni 2:5-7:
ISUS A FACUT 7 PASI IN JOS...
* Aici umilinta divina licareste in lumina supusa a intruparii, invaluita in umbrele unei alte lumi. Creatorul s-a
supus de bunavoie legilor Universului pe care tocmai El l-a creat. A renuntat la independenta si a devenit
dependent. A renuntat sa mai fie cel caruia I se slujea pentru a deveni cel ce slujea.
Ca si Dumnezeu,
Golindu-se de Sine Insusi, Fiul nu si-a pierdut divinitatea. Devenind un om, nu a ajuns sa fie mai mic/putin
decat Dumnezeu. In schimb in mod voluntar a renuntat la atuurile divinitatii Sale si puterea de Dumnezeu
pentru a deveni om.
Ca si Om,
Desi a trait pe deplin intreaga experienta umana, Isus era incapabil sa faca vreo doua lucruri, fiindca era si
Dumnezeu: sa-l asculte pe Satana si sa pacatuiasca. Atunci Evrei 4:14-16 ne arata ce fel de relatie ar trebui sa
avem cu Isus (APLICATIE! "Sa ne apropiem" ! Evrei 4:14-16)
BENEFICIILE PRACTICE ALE INTRUPARII LOGOSULUI
Intruparea Logosului, din nou, nu este o doctrina care sa ramana in sferele inalte ale gandirii teologice. Ea s-a
realizat cu un scop practic precis.
* "Carnea" sau "firea pamanteasca" fac aluzie la slabiciunea omeneasca. Si despre Isus se spune in 2 Cor.13:4
ca "a fost rastignit prin slabiciune" si ca a fost "omorat in trup"
(1 Petru 3:18), pentru a ne aduce la Dumnezeu.
* Prin intruparea lui Isus, Dumnezeu osandea pacatul (Rom.8:3...) in chiar resedinta de care el de folosea: il
osandea in firea pamanteasca, pentru ca astfel ceva minunat si irealizabil altfel sa fie acum posibil pentru noi:
porunca Legii incalcata de noi in firea pamanteasca sa fie acum IMPLINITA DE NOI. Cum? Prezenti inca in
firea pamanteasca, dar conducandu-ne dupa alte principii de viata! Alte "instincte"! Cele ale Duhului Sfant!
(vezi, referinta).
* In trup El a fost facut pacat pentru noi (2 Cor.5:21) pentru ca noi sa fim (incredibil! noi?) NEPRIHANIREA

LUI DUMNEZEU IN EL. Si asta in timp ce suntem inca in trup!

* Si iata inca o idee care ar fi mult pe placul lui Ioan: 2 Cor.13:4: "Intr-adevar, El a fost rastignit prin slabiciune,
dar traieste prin puterea lui Dumnezeu. Tot astfel si noi, suntem slabi in El (din cauza carnii noastre), dar, prin
puterea lui Dumnezeu, vom fi plini de viata cu El fata de voi." Cu El, noi putem fi plini de viata!
CONCLUZIA:
Deci, El s-a intrupat pentru ca:
1. Ca sa ne aduca la Dumnezeu.
2. Sa osandeasca pacatul in firea pamanteasca.
3. Porunca Legii lui Dumnezeu sa fie implinita in noi.
4. Ca noi sa fim neprihanirea lui Dumnezeu in El.
5. Pentru a fi plini de viata cu El.
In Isus, viata lui Dumnezeu s-a revarsat din abundenta asupra tuturor celor ce cred. De aceea, Isus s-a intrupat,
ne spune teologia NT. Ce nebuneste sa nu profitam de aceste beneficii !!
Tot ceea ce am facut pana acum a fost sa studiem prima parte a versetului 14: "Si Cuvantul s-a facut trup". Nam vazut ce insemna, "a locuit printre noi", "plin de har si de adevar", "Si noi am privit (1 Ioan 1!) slava Lui
(vezi Exod, Moise), o slava intocmai ca slava singurului nascut din Tatal".
"a locuit printre noi" - si la propriu si la figurat! Vecin cu ei si om ca ei. Ce ziceti daca il aveti pe Dumnezeu,
vecin de palier. Sta la ap.25?! E aproape? Da! Ei bine asta vrea sa spuna. Ca prin intrupare Dumnezeul cel
Vesnic s-a apropiat de noi.
Mai exact cuvantul este "si-a facut cortul", "a tabarat". Cortul din pustie al iudeilor era o umbra a realitatilor lui
Dumnezeu. O reprezentare materiala a marelui adevar al incarnarii
"Si noi am privit slava Lui, o slava intocmai ca slava singurului nascut din Tatal"
Divinul Fiu s-a facut carne. Cel Atotputernic s-a arata pe pamant sub chipul unui neajutorat copil al unor
oameni (ganditi-va la aceasta!: ca a trebuit hranit! Nu putea sa se hraneasca singur, trebuia schimbat de haine,
nu putea singur, trebuia ajutat sa umble, nu putea sa o faca singur, etc. E socant! Prin contrast putem intelege de
ce Dumnezeu s-a coborat atat de mult: pentru ca sa ne inalte pe noi nespus de mult!
"Si noi am privit slava Lui"
Cum? Sa vada slava lui Dumnezeu? Cum? Aceasi slava care era a Celui ce I s-a aratat lui Moise pe munte I se
arata si lui Ioan. Dar de data aceasta invaluita/investmantat intr-un trup parca pentru a-i proteja pe oameni de
expunerea la ucigatoarea revelare a slavei lui Dumnezeu, dar minunea minunilor, aratandu-le oamenilor toata
aceasta slava, odata ce-l privesc pe Isus Hristos.
In VT aceasta slava se arata cateodata. (Ex.16:10; 24:16; 40:34; 1 Regi 8:11). O slava ce nu se putea privi cu
ochiul liber de muritori. Era doar uneori vizibila. Insa in Hristos aceasta ramane cu noi. Ioan 17:22 "Eu le-am
dat slava, pe care Mi-ai dat-o Tu, pentru ca ei sa fie una cum si noi suntem una".
Ioan ne spune ca a vazut acea slava in trupul unui om. Al Omului Isus! Slava aceasta, infasurata in invelitoarea
vie a trupului lui Isus Hristos.
Nu este aceasta marturia apostolilor? Vezi 2 Petru 1:16, 1 Ioan 1:1; 4:14 ("vazut" cuvant cheie), cu referire
directa la Transfigurare.

Antinomian Antics

Sabotaging the Matrix

By Illuminatus Maximus

Eighteen hundred years ago, the Christian religion was in a state of chaotic upheaval. The Bible hadnt been
canonised yet, most important doctrinal issues were still up for grabs, and nobody could agree on what Jesus
message actually was.One of the most exotic flavours in this seething cauldron of theological controversy was
Gnosticism, a mystical philosophy whose adherents rejected the creator god of the Old Testament as an
incompetent fraud. Instead the Gnostic Christians dedicated their lives to the search for another god, an elusive
deity secretly hidden within the human spirit.This quest for the God within took many forms. Some Gnostics
advocated a total rejection of the world and society, living in the desert as ascetic monks; others married,
worked and played alongside their neighbours without ever discussing their spiritual pursuits.
The Gnostics had an intuitive, personal approach to enlightenment. There was no hierarchy, no code of conduct
and no central governing authority; the goal was liberation by any means necessary, not the creation of new
orthodoxies.
Misunderstood Mystics
While most Gnostic Christians contented themselves with respectable lives of study and contemplation, others
chose a more direct route. Often mischaracterised as libertines or devil-worshippers, it is the taboosmashing travelers of this shorter path who have inspired the most curiosity among modern researchers.
Taboo and Transgression
Perhaps no two human activities are as thickly ringed round with religious and social taboos as the twin
mysteries of sex and death the beginning and the end, the void from which human life emerges and the gulf
into which it disappears. French philosopher Georges Bataille argues the religious impulse is identical to erotic
desire for this reason both strive for the extinction of individual consciousness, either through the mystical
death of the ego (religion) or the little death of the orgasm (sex).In Batailles view, sexual and religious taboos
provoke their own violation or transgression simply by existing, for it is only through the very human
drive to define and then deflower (or desecrate) states of purity that we loosen the grip of rational utility and
plunge or collapse into ecstatic communion with the sacred.
Taboo-breaking, in other words, is a profoundly spiritual activity; whether through religion (the giddy euphoria
of the blood sacrifice), sex (the anarchic carnality of the orgy) or social play (the topsy-turvy lawlessness of the
carnival). Madmen, criminals and holy fools throughout the ages have always sought to tempt fate and break
on through to the other side.The notion that the psychological shock caused by performing forbidden activities
can lead to spiritual awakening is called antinomianism. The word antinomian means, literally, against the
law. Antinomian sects have been present throughout human history in almost every culture. Perhaps the bestknown modern example is that of the Aghora (or pure ones), Hindu holy men who practice necrophilia,
cannibalism and even coprophagy (the eating of feces) in their fierce quest for wisdom.1
Of course, from the Aghoras point of view, eating feces is simply God eating God. If everything is God, then
why would he discriminate between sights, smells and tastes or prefer certain experiences, substances or
actions?But perhaps he would, for like many antinomian cults, the Aghora often speak in code. The practitioner
who tells us that he eats his own feces may be speaking metaphorically of his meditative practice. Without
experiencing his path for ourselves, we simply cannot know.
As the above example should make abundantly clear, the antinomian path isnt for the casually curious, nor
should it be confused with mere hedonism. It demands absolute discretion, a disdain for disapproval, and an
unshakeable commitment to an ethic literally not of this world.
Beyond Good and Evil
Antinomian mystics have never been concerned with social status, physical comfort or moral redemption.
Instead, their goal has always been the acquisition of divine power through mystical merger with the godhead.
What society calls evil is what violates boundaries and overflows without limit, blurring the categories
between pure and impure, sacred and profane.The antinomian heroine deliberately ignores these distinctions,
performing acts that most people would see as dirty, disgusting or dangerous. Trespassing on divine territory,
she frees herself from societys taboos, dissolving shame, fear and judgment as she opens herself up to the
absolute.With every forbidden act, the soul is enlarged and strengthened, made more able to receive and
integrate the divine power unleashed thereby.
Antinomianism in Primitive Christianity
The antinomian current in Gnostic Christianity came in two flavours, weak and strong.
The weak antinomian ideal held that since the flesh was just a temporary vehicle for the spirit, mature

Christians could do whatever they pleased with their bodies. Biblical rules governing diet, behaviour, dress, sex,
etc., were restrictive and unnecessary distractions intended for the mundane herd, not the spiritual elite.
The strong antinomian ideal was embraced by those Christian groups we would today call Short Path.
Preaching depravity as a positive value, these urged believers to sin without restraint. Sex, fear and intoxicants
were used to break down taboos and social conditioning, releasing tremendous amounts of magical energy
while sanctifying the vilest deeds with a mysterious grace.
The Deep Things of Satan
The most infamous Gnostic antinomian of all was Carpocrates, a second-century teacher from the Egyptian city
of Alexandria whose students prided themselves on their knowledge of the deep things of Satan.2
According to St. Irenaeus, what made Carpocrates teachings so especially blasphemous was the idea Christians
had to bribe the Devil in order to return to God. The Devil would guide the souls of dead through the afterworld,
but only if they had already paid him in life through the ritualistic performance of a multitude of sins.
The Jesus Jail Break
Carpocrates taught that the Earth was a prison planet created by rebellious angels who had imprisoned human
souls here in shadowy tombs of flesh and bone. These angels were the Rulers, botched copies of another,
higher deity called the unborn god.
Jesus was a normal human being until he remembered his previous existence as a bodiless soul with the unborn
god outside space and time. As Jesus grew in knowledge and spiritual clarity, he realised that laws and
institutions (the 10 Commandments, for example) had been designed by the world-building Rulers to ensnare
and mislead us. The best way to get over sins was to just give into them. Like water seeking its own level, the
soul could then return to the unborn god, unencumbered by earthly limits and restrictions.
To the Carpocratians, Jesus was a model of someone who had achieved total freedom of the soul and since
the source of Jesus power lay in His utter contempt for the angels created universe, anyone could become
greater than Jesus by despising things below even more than He had. For this reason, some Carpocratians
considered themselves equal to Jesus Himself, while others considered themselves even more powerful.
The Carpocratians incorporated secret handshakes, dream interpretation, magic spells and other occult rites into
Christian worship. Having defeated and risen above the creators and rulers of the world, the accomplished
Carpocratian could now command these same entities, ruling over the invisible forces of creation much as they
themselves ruled over the Earth.
Moral prohibitions and taboos seemed to provoke rather than inhibit the Carpocratians. As heresy-hunter St.
Irenaeus explained: [The Carpocratians] have reached such a pitch of madness that they say that it is in their
power to do whatever is irreligious and impious, for they say that actions are good and bad only in accordance
with human opinion. In the transmigrations into bodies, souls ought to experience every kind of life and action...
so that... their souls... may not, when they depart, still suffer any lack. They must act in such a way that they will
not be forced into another body if something is still lacking in their freedom.3
The purpose of human life, in this view, was not to obey the rules set down by the fallen angels who built the
world and stranded us here, but to achieve enlightenment and escape the sphere of illusion altogether. Laws
were a sort of spiritual obstacle, designed to keep us motivated by pain and pleasure. It was this misguided
tendency to construct reality in terms of opposites (for example, right and wrong, good and evil, reward
and punishment) that kept us trapped here in the cycle of death and rebirth.
Jesus revealed how to escape from the cycle of reincarnation in the following parable:
When you are with your adversary on the way, act so that you may be freed from him, lest he deliver you to the
judge and the judge to the officer and he cast you into prison; truly I say to you, you will not come out from
there until you pay the last quadrant.4
This adversary was the Devil, the leader of the world-creating Rulers. After death, the Devil handed the souls
of the ignorant and inexperienced over to the judge and then to the officer; these angelic bureaucrats
recycled unprepared souls by trapping them in new bodies and sending them back to the Earth to live again. The
body was a prison.
You will not come out from there until you pay the last quadrant, meant that no one escaped from the Rulers
who created the Earth; souls are always returned here until they have completed all sins. The soul which had
completed all sins in one lifetime was freed from the cycle of reincarnation and returned to the god above the
world-creating Rulers (cf. Luke 12:58); there was no other way to be saved.

Those who engaged in each and every sin at least once would not be forced to live again. Having paid their
debts by exploring every nook and cranny of human life, they were no longer required to live in bodies.
Carpocrates claimed that Jesus revealed these secret teachings only to the disciples (Mark 4:10-11) who could
understand them. Love and faith were enough to attain salvation (cf. Gal. 5:6); good and bad existed only
as matters of human opinion.
Christian Cavemen
The controversy over Carpocrates didnt end with St. Irenaeus. St. Clement accuses the mischievous mystic of
stealing a copy of The Secret Gospel of Mark from the Church library in Alexandria and adapting it to suit his
blasphemous and carnal teachings.5
St. Clement doesnt tell us what these teachings were, but since Carpocrates was an enthusiastic student of
Platonic philosophy we can probably take an educated guess. Secret Mark has Jesus spending the night in a
cave showing the Kingdom of God to a man He raised from the dead. Similarly, Platos cave myth
compares ordinary waking life to imprisonment in a dark tunnel filled with flickering shadows, a pit we can
only escape with the help of philosophy. Carpocrates probably combined the myth of Platos Cave with the
teachings of Secret Mark and adapted them to an initiation ritual intended to lead his students to the eternal
world outside the cave.
Return to the Garden of Eden
Carpocrates goal was to escape from the universe; his son Epiphanes sought to reform it instead. A teenage
prodigy whose radical views on marriage and property have influenced generations of Christian freethinkers,
Epiphanes set out his philosophy in a revolutionary essay called On Righteousness and Justice.
God, Epiphanes argued, has provided sunlight and plant life indeed, the whole planet for our common use
and enjoyment. In a world of such abundance, why would theft or jealousy even exist? These vices arose,
Epiphanes concluded, when blind, ignorant men perverted Gods gifts by greedily insisting on private
ownership. Given Gods limitless generosity, why did so many Christians insist on keeping their food, animals
and land locked up, not to mention their wives? By selfishly refusing to share the benefits of matrimony with
their fellow believers, werent they spiting the same God who blessed us with strong sexual drives and desires
in the first place? Epiphanes had a novel response to the stifling traditions which had so provoked his father:
When God told His chosen not to swap wives He must have been joking. Consequently one must understand the
saying You shall not desire as if the lawgiver [God] was making a jest, to which he added the even more comic
words your neighbours goods [Exodus 20:17]. For he himself who gave the desire to sustain the race orders
that it is to be suppressed, though he removes it from no other animals. And by the words your neighbours
wife he says something even more ludicrous, since he forces what should be common property to be treated as
a private possession.6
Sabotaging the Matrix
Epiphanes subversive reading of Mosaic Law was shared by the Cainites, a mysterious second-century
Christian group who took their name from Abels homicidal brother. The Cainites were not escapists like the
Carpocratians or reformers like Epiphanes; instead we might describe them as saboteurs. Like many other
Gnostic Christian groups, the Cainites believed the Earth we inhabit was a sort of cosmic prison or zoo, a
labyrinth for the souls of the fallen and the lost ruled over by an incompetent and insane Demiurge. This
Demiurge was identified with Yahweh, the wrathful creator god of Genesis. His mother was Sophia, the hidden
Goddess of Wisdom. The Cainites rejected the diabolical Demiurge, looking instead to Sophia (the superior
power) for guidance and protection. Like Yahweh, Sophia had chosen people of her own; through Cain, Judas,
the Sodomites, and all of the other outcasts of the Old Testament, she worked tirelessly to undermine Yahwehs
authority. The Cainites were strong antinomians who treated sinning as a religious duty. Through the
systematic violation of Yahwehs moral laws, they sought to undo the actual physical laws (e.g., gravity,
friction) which make life on Earth possible. The Cainites invoked angels while sinning for assistance, not
forgiveness in short, they were trying to sabotage the Matrix: And they say they cannot be saved in any other
way, except they pass through all things, just as Carpocrates also said. And at every sinful and base action an
angel is present and instills in him who ventures the deed audacity and impurity And this is the perfect
knowledge, to enter without fear into such operations, which it is not lawful even to name.7
With their audacious pursuit of unspeakable acts, the Cainites seem to have anticipated the pessimistic neoPlatonism of Jean Baudrillard, the French postmodernist whose concept of simulation has so influenced

contemporary science fiction: For example: it would be interesting to see whether the repressive apparatus
would not react more violently to a simulated hold-up than to a real one? For the latter only upsets the order of
things, the right of property, whereas the other suggests, over and above its object, that law and order
themselves might really be nothing more than a simulation.8
In a simulated world, neither crime nor punishment can exist in any meaningful way how could they, when
victims, police and money are all just different aspects of the same illusion?
Conclusion
The antinomian legacy is wreathed in paradox. What little we know about these rebellious holy men comes only
from the reports of their enemies. What most Christians called sins the antinomian Gnostic called initiations
no wonder their message so horrified the establishment! The antinomian path asks difficult questions. Can we
make ourselves pure by wallowing in impurity? What is pure? What is impure? What is sin? What is not? Does
might make right? Does power corrupt? Is pleasure a crime? Do the same rules apply equally to everyone? Are
some laws higher than the laws of man? In a world where conventional morality defines civilian deaths as
collateral damage, prejudice as a family value, and pregnancy as an epidemic, we may find ourselves
agreeing with Batailles poignant plea for collective awakening when he writes:
Lift the curse of those feelings which oppress men, which force them into wars they do not want, and consign
them to work from whose fruits they never benefit Assume within oneself perversion and crime, not as
exclusive values, but as a prelude to their integration into the totality of humanity. Participate in the destruction
of a world as it presently exists, with eyes open to the world which is yet to be.9
Where nothing is true and everything is permitted, the antinomian becomes the only moralist worth listening
to. Perhaps these ancient heretics still have something to teach us today after all.
Footnotes:
1. Robert Svoboda, Aghora: At the Left Hand of God, pp 183-84, pub. 1986
2. Clement of Alexandria, Letter to Theodore, from Willis Barnstones The Other Bible, pp. 341-42, pub.
A.D.1984
3. St. Irenaeus of Lyon, Against Heresies, Barnstone, Ibid, pp. 648-49
4. 3. Luke 12:58 59; Matt. 5:25-26
5. Clement of Alexandria, Ibid.
6. Epiphanes, On Righteousness and Justice, Barnstone, Ibid, pp. 649-50
7. St. Irenaeus of Lyon, Against Heresies, Barnstone, Ibid, , pp. 651-52
8. Jean Baudrillard, Simulations, pp.38-39, pub. 1983
9. Radio National, Encounter: Georges Bataille, 22/4/2001, www.abc.net.au/rn/relig/enc/stories/s281136.htm
The Ten Major Principles of the Gnostic Revelation
From Exegesis, by Philip K. Dick
The Gnostic Christians of the second century believed that only a special revelation of knowledge rather than
faith could save a person. The contents of this revelation could not be received empirically or derived a priori.
They considered this special gnosis so valuable that it must be kept secret. Here are the ten major principles of
the gnostic revelation: The creator of this world is demented. The world is not as it appears, in order to hide the
evil in it, a delusive veil obscuring it and the deranged deity. There is another, better realm of God, and all our
efforts are to be directed toward returning there , bringing it here. Our actual lives stretch thousands of years
back, and we can be made to remember our origin in the stars. Each of us has a divine counterpart unfallen who
can reach a hand down to us to awaken us. This other personality is the authentic waking self; the one we have
now is asleep and minor. We are in fact asleep, and in the hands of a dangerous magician disguised as a good
god, the deranged creator deity. The bleakness, the evil and pain in this world, the fact that it is a deterministic
prison controlled by the demented creator causes us willingly to split with the reality principle early in life, and
so to speak willingly fall asleep in delusion. You can pass from the delusional prison world into the peaceful
kingdom if the True Good God places you under His grace and allows you to see reality through His eyes.
Christ gave, rather than received, revelation; he taught his followers how to enter the kingdom while still alive,
where other mystery religions only bring about amnesis: knowledge of it at the "other time" in "the other
realm," not here. He causes it to come here, and is the living agency to the Sole Good God (i.e. the Logos).
Probably the real, secret Christian church still exists, long underground, with the living Corpus Christi as its

head or ruler, the members absorbed into it. Through participation in it they probably have vast, seemingly
magical powers. The division into "two times" (good and evil) and "two realms" (good and evil) will abruptly
end with victory for the good time here, as the presently invisible kingdom separates and becomes visible. We
cannot know the date. During this time period we are on the sifting bridge being judged according to which
power we give allegiance to, the deranged creator demiurge of this world or the One Good God and his
kingdom, whom we know through Christ.
To know these ten principles of Gnostic Christianity is to court disaster.

The seven Sermons to the dead, written by Basilides in Alexandria,

the city where the East toucheth the West
Sermon 1
The Dead came back from Jerusalem, where they found not what they sought. They prayed me let them in and
besought my word, and thus I began my teaching. Harken: I begin with nothingness. Nothingness is the same as
fullness. In infinity full is no better than empty. Nothingness is both empty and full. As well might ye say
anything else of nothingness,as for instance, white is it, or black, or again, it is not, or it is. A thing that is
infinite and eternal hath no qualities, since it hath all qualities. This nothingness or fullness we name the
Pleroma. Therein both thinking and being cease, since the eternal and infinite possess no qualities. In it no being
is, for he then would be distinct from the pleroma, and would possess qualities which would distinguish him as
something distinct from the pleroma. In the pleroma there is nothing and everything. It is quite fruitless to think
about the pleroma, for this would mean self-dissolution. Creatura is not in the pleroma, but in itself. The
pleroma is both beginning and end of the created beings. It pervadeth them, as the light od the sun everywhere
pervadeth the air. Although the pleroma prevadeth altogether, yet hath created being no share thereof, just as
wholly transparent body becometh neither light nor dark through the light nor dark through the light which
pervadeth it. We are,however , the pleroma itself, for we are a part of the eternal and the infinite. But we have
no share thereof, as we are from the pleroma infinitely removed; not spiritually or temporally, but essentially,
since we are distinguished from the pleroma in our essence as creatura, which is confined within time and
space.
Yet because we are parts of the pleroma, the pleroma is also in us. Even in the smallest point is the pleroma
endless, eternal, and entire, since small and great are qualities which are contained in it. It is that nothingness
which is everywhere whole and continuous. Only figuratively, therefore, do I speak of created being as part of
the pleroma. Because, actually, the pleroma is nowhere divided, since it is nothingness. We are also the whole
pleroma, because, figuratively, the pleroma is the smallest point (assumed only, not existing) in us and the
boundless firmanent about us. But wherefore, then, do we speak of the pleroma at all, since it is thus everything
and nothing? I speak of it to make a beginning somewhere, and also to free you from the delusion that
somewhere, either without or within, there standeth something fixed, or in some way established, from the
beginning. Every so-called fixed and certain thing is only relative. That alone is fixed and certain which is
subject to change. What is changeable, however, is creature. Therefore is it the one thing which is fixed and
certain because it hath qualities: or as even a quality itself.
The question ariseth: How did creatura originate? Created beings came to pass, not creatura: since created being
is the very quality of the pleroma, as much as non-creation which is the eternal death. In all times and places is
creation, in all times and places is death. The pleroma hath all, distinctiveness and non-distinctiveness.
Distinctiveness is creatura.It is distinct. Distinctivness is its essence. and therefore it distinguisheth. Wherefore
also he distinguished qualities of the pleroma which are not. He distinguisheth them out of his own nature.
Therefore he must speak of qualities of the pleroma which are not.
What use, say ye, to speak of it? Saidst thou not thyself, there is no profit in thinking upon the pleroma? That
said I unto you, to free you from the delusion that we are able to think about the pleroma. When we distinguish
qualities of the pleroma, we are speaking from the ground of our own distinctiveness and concerning our own
distinctiveness. But we have said nothing concerning the pleroma. Concerning our own distinctiveness,
however, it is needfull to speak, whereby we may distinguish ourselves enough. Our very nature is

distinctiveness. If we are not true to this nature we do not distinguish ourselves enough. Therefore must we
make distinctions of qualities.
What is the harm, ye ask, in not distingusihing oneself? If we do not distinguish, we get beyond our own nature,
away from creatura. We fall into indistinctiveness, which is the other quality of the pleroma. We fall into the
pleroma itself and cease to be creatures. We are given over to dissolution in nothingness. This is the death of the
creature. Therefore we die in such measure as we do not distinguish. Hence the natural striving of the creature
goeth towards distinctiveness, fighteth against primeval, perilous sameness. This is called the PRINCIPIUM
INDIVIDUATIONIS. This principle is the essence of the creature. From this you can see why indistictiveness
and non-distinction are a great danger for the creature. We must, therefore, distinguish the qualities of the
pleroma. The qualities are PAIRS OF OPPOSITES, such as - The Effective and the ineffective.
Fullness and Emptiness. Living and Dead. Difference and Sameness. Light and Darkness.
The Hot and the Cold. Force and Matter. Time and Space. Good and Evil. Beauty and Ugliness. The One and
the Many. The pairs of opposities are qualities of the pleroma which are not, because each balanceth each. As
we are the pleroma itself, we also have all these qualities in us. Because the very ground of our nature is
distinctiveness, which meaneth 1. These qualities are distinct and seperate in us one from the other; therefore they are not balanced and void,
but are effective. Thus are the victims of the pairs of opposites. The pleroma is rent in us.
2. The qualities belong to the pleroma, and only in the name and sign of distinctiveness can and must we
possess and live them. We must distinguish ourselves from qualities. In the pleroma they are balanced and void;
in us not. Being distinguished from them delivereth us.
When we strive after the good or the beautiful, we thereby forget our own nature, which is disinctiveness, and
we are delivered over to the qualities of the pleroma, which are pairs of opposites. We labor to attain the good
and the beautiful, yet at the same time we also lay hold of the evil and the ugly, since in the pleroma these are
one with the good and the beautiful. When, however, we remain true to our own nature, which is
distinctiveness, we distinguish ourselves from the good and the beautiful,therefore, at the same time, from the
evil and ugly. And thus we fall not into the pleroma, namely, into nothingness and dissolution. Thou sayest, ye
object, that difference and sameness are also qualities of the pleroma. How would it be, then, if we strive after
difference? Are we, in so doing, not true to our own nature? And must we none the less be given over to the
sameness when we strive after difference? Ye must not forget that the pleroma hath no qualities. We create them
through thinking. If, therefore, ye strive after difference or sameness, or any qualities whatsoever, ye pursue
thought which flow to you our of the pleroma: thoughts, namely, concerning non-existing qualities of the
pleroma. Inasmuch as ye run after these thoughts, ye fall again into the pleroma, and reach difference and
sameness at the same time. Not your thhinking, but your being, is distinctiveness. Therefore not after difference,
ye think it, must ye strive; but after YOUR OWN BEING. At bottom, therefore, there is only one striving,
namely, the striving after your own being. If ye had this striving ye would not need to know anything about the
pleroma and its qualities, and yet would ye come to your right goal by virtue of your own being. Since,
however, thought estrangeth from being, that knowledge must I trach you wherewith ye may be able to hold
your thought in leash.
Sermon 2
In the night the dead stood along the wall and cried: We would have knowledge of god.Where is god? Is god
dead? God is not dead. Now, as ever, he liveth. God is creatura, for he is something definite, and therefore
distinct from the pleroma. God is quality of the pleroma, and everything I said of creatura also is true
concerning him. He is distinguished, however, from created beings through this, that he is more indefinite and
indeterminable than they. He is less distinct than created beings, since the ground of his being is effective
fullness. Only in so far as he is definite and distinct is he creatura, and in like measure is he the manifestation of
the effective fullness of the pleroma.
Everthing which we do not distinguish falleth into the pleroma and is made void by its opposite. If, therefore,
we do noy distinguish god, effective fullness is for us extinguished. Moreover god is the pleroma itself, as
likewise each smallest point in the created and uncreated is pleroma itself. Effective void is the nature of the
devil. God and decil are the first manifestations of nothingness, which we call the pleroma. It is indifferent
wether the pleroma is or is not, since in everything it is balanced and void. Not so creatura. In so far as god and
devil are creatura they do not extinguish each other, but stand one against the other as effective opposites. We

need no proof of their existence. It is enough that we must always be speaking of them. Even if both were not,
creatura, of its own essential distinctiveness, would forever distinguish them anew out of the pleroma.
Everything that discrimination taketh out of the pleroma is a pair of opposites. To God, therefore, always
belongeth the devil. This inseparability is as close and, as your own life hath made you see, as indissoluble as
the pleroma itself. Thus it is that both stand very close to the pleroma, in which all opposites are extinguished
and joined.
God and devil are distinguished by the qualities of fullness and emptiness, generation and destruction.
EFFECTIVENESS is common to both. Effectiveness joineth them. Effectiveness, therefore, standeth above
both; is a god above god, since in its effect it uniteth fullness and emptiness. This is a god whom ye knew not,
for mankind forgot it. We name it by its name ABRAXAS. It is more indefinite still than god and devil. That
god may be distinguished from it, we name god HELIOS or sun. Abraxas is effect. Nothing standeth opposed to
it but the ineffective; hence its effective natyre freely unfoldeth itself. The ineffective is not, therefore resisteth
not. Abraxas standeth above the sun and above the devil. It is improbable probability, unreal reality. Had the
pleroma a being, Abraxas would be its manifestation. It is the effective itself, nor any particular effect, but effect
in general.
It is unreal reality, because it hath no definite effect. It is also creatura, because it is distinct from the pleroma.
The sun hath a definite effect, and so hath the devil. Wherefore do they appear to us more effective than
indefinite Abraxas. It is force, duration, change. The dead now raised a great tumult, for they were Christians.
Sermon 3
Like mists arising from a marsh, the dead came near and cried: Speak further unto us concerning the supreme
god. Hard to know is the deity of Abraxas. Its power is the greatest, because man perceiveth it not. From the sun
he draweth the summum bonum; from the devil the infimum malum: but from Abraxas LIFE, altogether
indefinite, the mother of good and evil.
Smaller and weaker life seemeth to be than the summum bonum; wherefore is it also hard to conceive that
Abraxas transcendeth even the sun in power, who is himself the radient source of all the force of life. Abraxas is
the sun, and at the same time the eternally sucking gorge of the void, the belittling and dismembering devil.
The power of Abraxas is twofold; but ye see it not, because for your eyes the warring opposites of this power
are extinguished. What the god-sun speaketh is life. What the devil speaketh is death. But Abraxas speaketh that
hallowed and accursed word which is life and death at the same time. Abraxas begetteth truth and lying, good
and evil, light and darkness, in the same word and in the same act. Wherefore is Abraxas terrible. It is splendid
as the lion in the instant he striketh down his victim. It is beautiful as a day in spring. It is the great Pan himself
and also the small one. It is Priapos. It is the monster of the under-world, a thousand-armed polyp, coiled knot
of winged serpents, frenzy. It is the hermaphrodite of the earliest beginning. It is the lord of the toads and frogs,,
which live in the water and gets up on the land, whose chorus ascendeth at noon and at midnight. It is
abundance that seeketh union with emptiness. It is holy begetting. It is love and love's murder. It is the saint and
his betrayer. It is the brightest light of day and the darkest night of madness. To look upon it, is blindness. To
know it, is sickness. To worship it, is death. To fear it, is wisdom. To resist it not, is redemption.
God dwelleth behind the sun, the devil behind the night. What god bringeth forth out of the light of the devil
sucketh into the night. But Abraxas is the world, its becoming and its passing- Upon every gift that cometh from
the god-sun the devil layeth his curse.
Everything that ye entreat from the god-sun begetteth a deed from the devil. Everything that ye create with the
god-sun giveth effective power to the devil. That is terrible Abraxas. It is the mightiest creature, and in it the
creature is afraid of itself. It is the manifest opposition to the pleroma and its nothingness. It is the son's horror
of the mother. It is the mother's love for the son. It is the delight of the earth and the cruelty of the heavens.
Before its countenance man becometh like stone. Before it there is no question and no reply. It is the life of
creatura. It is the operation of distinctiveness. It is the love of man. It is the speech of man. It is the appearance
and the shadow of man. It is illusory reality.
Now the dead howled and raged, for they were unperfected.
Sermon 4
The dead filled the place murmuring and said; Tell us of gods and devils, accursed one! The god-suun is the
highest good, the devil its opposite. Thus have ye two gods. But there are many high and good things and many
great evils. Among these are two god-devils; the one is the Burning One , the other the Growing One. The

burning one is EROS, who hath the form of flame. Flame giveth light because it consumeth. The growing one is
the TREE OF LIFE.. It buddeth, as in growing it heapeth up living stuff. Eros flameth up and dieth. But the tree
of life groweth with slow and constant increase through unmeasured time. Good and evil are united in the
flame. Good and evil are united in the increase of the tree. In their divinity stand life and love opposed.
Innumerable as the host of the stars is the number of gods and devils. Each star is a god, and each space that a
star filleth is a devil. But the empty-fullness of the whole is the pleroma. The operation of the whole is Abraxas,
to whom only the ineffective standeth opposed. Four is the number of the principal gods, as four is the number
of the world's measurements. One is the beginning, the god-sun. Two is Eros; for he bindeth twain together and
outspreadeth himself in brightness. Three is the Tree of Life, for it filleth space with bodily forms. Four is the
devil, for he openeth all that is closed. All that is formed of bodily nature doth he dissolve; he is the destroyer in
whom everything is brought to nothing.
For me, to whom knowledge hath been given of the multiplicity and diversity of the good, it is well. But woe
unto you, who replace these incompatible many by a single god. For in so doing ye beget the torment which is
bred from not understanding, and ye mutilate the creature whose nature and aim is distinctiveness. How can ye
be true to your own nature when ye try to change the many into one? What ye do unto the gods is done likewise
unto you. Ye all become equal and thus is your nature maimed.
Equalities shall prevail not for god, but only for the sake of man. For the gods are many, whilst men are few.
The gods are mighty and can endure their manifoldness. For like the stars they abide in solitude, parted one
from the other by immense distances. Therefore they dwell together and need communion, that they may bear
their separateness. For redemtion's sake I teach you the rejected truth, for the sake of which I was rejected. The
multiplicity of the gods correspondeth to the multiplicity of man. Numberless gods await the human state.
Numberless gods have been men. Man shareth in nature of the gods. He cometh from the gods and goeth unto
god. Thus, just as it serveth not to reflect upon the plerome, it availeth not to worship the multiplicity of the
gods. Least of all availeth it to worship the first god, the effective abundance and the summum bonum.. By our
prayer we can add to it nothing, and from it nothing take; because the effective void swalloweth all. The bright
gods form the celestial world. It is manifold and infinitely spreading and increasing. The god-sun is the supreme
lord of the world. The dark gods form the earth-world. They are simple and infinitely diminishing and
declining. The devil is the earth-world's lowest lord, the moon-spirit, satellite of the earth, smaller, colder, and
more dead than the earth. There is no difference between the might of the celestial gods and those of the earth.
The celestial gods magnify, the earth-gods diminish. Measurelesss is the movement of both.
Sermon 5
The dead mocked and cried: Teach us, fool, of the Church and the holy Communion. The world of the gods is
made manifest in spirituality and in sexuality. The celestial ones appear in spirituality, the earthly in sexuality.
Spirituality conceiveth and embraceth. It is womanlike and therefore we call it MATER COELESTIS, the
celestial mother. Sexuality engendereth and createth. It is manlike, and therefore we call it PHALLOS, the
earthly father. The sexuality of man is more of the earth, the sexuality of woman is more of the spirit. The
spirituality of man is more of heaven, it goeth to the greater. The spirituality of woman is more of the earth, it
goeth to the smaller. Lying and devilish is the spirituality of the man which goeth to the smaller. Lying and
devilish is the spirituality of the woman which goeth to the greater. Each must go its own place. Man and
woman become devils one to the other when they divide not their spiritual ways, for the nature of the creatura is
distinctiveness. The sexuality of man hath an earthward course, the sexuality of woman a spiritual. Man and
woman becomes devils one to the other if they distinguish not their sexuality. Man shall know of the smaller,
woman the greater. Man shall distinguish himself both from spirituality and sexuality. He shall spirituality
Mother, and set her between heaven and earth. He shall call sexuality Phallos, annd set him between himself
and earth. For the Mother and the Phallos are super-human daemons which reveal the world of the gods. They
are for us more effective than the gods, because they are closely akin to our own nature. Should ye not
distinguish yourselves from sexuality and from spirituality, and not regard them as of a nature borh above you
and beyond, then are ye delivered over to them as qualities of the pleroma. Spirituality and sexuality are not
your qualities, not things ye possess and contain. But they possess and contain you; for they are powerfull
daemons, manifestations of the gods, and are, therefore, things which reach beyond you, existing in themselves.
No man hath a spirituality unto himself, or a sexuality unto himself. But he standeth under the law of
Spirituality and of sexuality. No man, therefore, escapeth these daemons. Ye shall look upn them as daemons,

and as a common task and danger, a common burdon which life hath laid upon you. Thus is life for you also a
common task and danger, as are the gods, and first of all terrible Abraxas. Man is weak, therefore is communion
indispensable. If your communion be not under the sign of the Mother, then is it under the sign of the Phallos.
No communion is suffering and sickness. Communion in everything is dismemberment and dissolution.
Distinctiveness leadeth to singleness. Singleness is opposed to communion. But because of man's weakneess
over against the gods and daemons and their invincible law is communion needful, not for man's sake, but
because of the gods.The gods force you to communion. As much as they force you, so much is the communion
needed, more is evil. In communion let every man submit to the others, that communion be maintained, for ye
need it. In Singleness the one man shall be superior to the others, that every man may come to himself and
avoid slavery. In communion there shall be continence. In Singleness there shall be prodigality. Communion is
depth. Singleness is height. Right measure in communion purifieth and preserveth. Right measure in Singleness
purifieth and increaseth. Communion giveth us warmth, Singleness giveth us light.
Sermon 6
The daemons of sexuality approacheth our soul as a serpent. It is half human and appeareth as thought-desire.
The daemon of spirituality descendeth into our soul as the white bird. It is half human and appeareth as desirethought. The Serpent is an earthly soul, half daemonic, a spirit, and akin to the spirits of the dead. Thus too, like
these, she swarmeth around in the things of earth, making us either fear them or pricking us with intemperate
desires. The Serpent hath a nature like unto woman. She seeketh company of the dead who are held by the spell
of the earth, they who found not the way beyond that leadeth to singleness. The Serpent is a whore. She
wantoneth with the devil and with evil spirits; a mischievous tyrant and tormentor, ever seducing to evilest
company. The White Bird is a half-celestial soul of man. He bideth with the Mother, from time to time
descending.The bird hath a nature like unto man, and is effective thought. He is chaste and solitary, a messenger
of the Mother. He flieth high above earth. He commandeth singleness. He bringeth knowledge from the distant
ones who went before and are perfected. He beareth our word above to the Mother. She intercedeth, she
warneth, but against the gods she hath no power. She is a vessel of the sun. The serpent goeth below and with
her cunning she lameth the phallic daemon, or else goadeth him on. She yieldeth up the too crafty toughts of the
earthy one, those thoughts which creep through every hole and cleave to all things with desirousness. The
Serpent, doubtless, willeth it not, yet she must be of use to us. She fleeth our grasp , thus showing us the way,
which with our human wits we could not find.
With disdainful glance the dead spake: Cease this talk of gods and daemons and souls. At this hath long been
known to us.
Sermon 7
Yet when night was come the dead again approached with lamentable mien and said: There is yet one matter we
forgot to mention. Teach us about man. Man is a gateway, through which from the outer world of gods,
daemons, and souls ye pass into the inner world; out of the greater into the smaller world. Small and transitory
is man. Already is he behind you, and once again ye find yourselves in endless space, in the smaller of
innermost infinity. At immeasurable distance standeth one single Star in the zenith. This is the one god of this
one man. This is his world, his pleroma, his divinity. In this world is man Abraxas, the creator and destroyer of
his one world. This Star is the god and the goal of man. This is his one guiding god. In him goeth man to his
rest. Toward him goeth the long journey of the soul after death. In him shineth forth as light all that man
bringeth back from the greater world. To this one god man shall pray. Prayer increaseth the light of the Star. It
casteth a bridge over death. It prepareth life for the smaller world and assuageth the hopleless desires of the
greater. When the greater world waxeth cold, burneth the Star. Between man and his one god there standeth
nothing, so long as man can turn away his eyes from the flaming spectacle of Abraxas. Man here, god there.
Weakness and nothingness here, there eternally creative power. Here nothing but darkness and chilling
moisture. There Wholly Sun.
Whereupon the dead were silent and ascended like the smoke above the herdman's fire, who through the night
kept watch over his flock.
ANAGRAMMA: GAHINNEVERAHTUNIN ZEHGESSURKLACH ZUNNUS.
Demiurge vs. Satan

It is hard for me to imagine anyone grouping Gnostics in with "fundamentalists," since fundamentalism refers to
a literal interpretation of scripture, whereas Gnosticism of all stripes posits that the overt, literal content of
scripture is not its "real" meaning, that the truth can only be found by not only not taking scripture literally, but
by a process of personal religious experience, namely Gnosis. I really enjoyed reading your description of the
demiurge and agree that when one studies the Gnostics texts he is found to be ignorant and foolish rather than
evil, but I sometimes wonder if there is more to it than that for as quoted from another list in what I believe to
be somewhat similar to Stephan Hoeller's view: "There is a point where Buddhism and Gnosticism part ways.
Gnosticism holds that there is a continuous transpersonal consciousness that has an interest in keeping up the
illusion, which means keeping the individual blind." Reading the Secret book of John always leaves me in a
cold sweat for it certainly seems to agree with the view that ignorance has a rather active rather than passive
role. It is hard for me to imagine anyone grouping Gnostics in with "fundamentalists," since fundamentalism
refers to a literal interpretation of scripture, whereas Gnosticism of all stripes posits that the overt, literal content
of scripture is not its "real" meaning, that the truth can only be found by not only not taking scripture literally,
but by a process of personal religious experience, namely Gnosis. But while there are a few similarities between
Satan as conceived by traditional Christianity and the Demiurge as conceived by Gnosticism, the differences are
greater. For starters, Satan, the fallen angel of Christian mythology, deliberately chose to be evil and defy the
will of God the Father. In Gnostic thought, the Demiurge is not so much evil as He is mistaken. He is thought
to honesly believe he is God Almighty, when he is not. Thus he sets out to convince humans he is "The Lord
Thy God" not to deceive them, but to convince them of what he believes to be the truth, but is not. In Gnostic
cosmology, the fallenness, the imperfection of the created world needs no "Satan" to account for it, because the
world is, at least in part, the creation of the Demiurge, and this accounts for its imperfection. But the
imperfection of the world, according to the Gnostics, is in essence part of the plan, since the Demiurge is an
"emanation" of the Eternal and Unknowable God, not an angel who chose to defy God. The Demiurge's belief
that he is "the" God is his own mistaken belief. Thus, while the Gnostics are often criticized for being
"dualistic" in viewing creation as imperfect, in contrast with an imagined perfect realm, there is a sense in
which one can view Gnosticism as being more directed towards the unity of all things, because the imperfection
of the world was an inherent part of the creative process, and not the result of anyone defying God's plan. The
imperfection of the world, in essence, came in as a result of the distance between God the "Forefather," the
"real" God, and creation, much like a game of "telephone" in which each time a statement is repeated, errors
inevitably creep in without the intent of anyone to deceive. The "trapping" conceived of by the Gnostics is also
intended as a description of humankind's current state, not a place to which souls are sentenced because of sins
after death. The means of escape from the trap is different, too, in Gnosticism versus conventional Christianity.
In Christianity as people usually conceive of it, one avoids hell by performing good works and by avoiding evil
deeds, whereas the "official" position of organized Christianity is actually that one is saved from hell by "faith,"
although what faith is, exactly, is often debated in Christian circles. Most Christians believe that "faith" means
"believing that Jesus is Lord." In Gnosticism, people are, while on earth, already in a "trapped" state, and one
escapes from this only by "gnosis," that is, an intuitive process of coming to know the truth, and the truth sets
one free. What this "truth" is that frees is not stated explicitly by Gnostics, since just telling someone the truth
is of no benefit, since to be "saved" the person must see the truth for themselves. But the concept of gnosis is
usually thought to include the ideas central to the Gnostic conception of reality, such as that scripture is not to
be taken at face value, that the person in the Old Testament who claims to be "God" is actually the Demiurge,
and so on.
Gnostics usually view the number of those who "know" as being a distinct minority of people, although in
theory, anyone is capable of gnosis. Having entered into Gnosticism, myself, from the realm of Zen Buddhism,
I tend to want to take the boddhisatva's vow--that of liberating all sentient beings--into my own version of
Gnosticism, and therefore I want to bring Gnosis to all people, although that is, I have been told over and over,
an unrealistic vision. As far as books, a good and easily obtained introduction to Gnostic thought is to
download the books of the Nag Hammadi Codex, although many of these are not easy reading. Certainly,
anyone who has never read the Gospel of Thomas ought to do so, in my occasionally humble opinion, as soon
as possible. This one is easy reading, and anyone familiar with the four Gospels in the New Testament will
recognize many of the sayings of Jesus, although there will be some that will likely turn your head. There is a
Gnostic Christian website, "The Pearl," which provides some more easily accessible Gnostic writings. A very

interesting web site called "Metareligion" is also an opening into certain kinds of Gnostic thought, although
there is a particular "slant" apparent in that site, which involves the heavy influence of the thought of one
particular person. Of course, the key to Gnosis is a personal experience of gnosis, that is, knowing by intuition,
which can be obtained by anyone who practices any form of meditation or structured contemplation. In my
own experience, I came to Gnosticism primarily through my study and employment of Zen Buddhist spiritual
technologies. Many are the paths... What is the difference in the way that Gnostics view the demiurge
versus the way Orthodox Christian view Satan? Seems to me that they are both perceived as evil and a
misleader of humans? Also, there is the common trait of trapping the human's soul, either here in this reality
or in hell. It just seems to me it is the same diabolism of a diety, just two different names. I guess that I just have
a problem with fundamentalist views. I would appreciate any help or book references that you guys could give
me regarding this question. I guess what I am trying to do is my feeble attempt at distancing Gnosticism from
the orthodox Christianity that I grew up with. I don't want to fall victim to just replacing one crutch for another.
It seems to me if there are no angels, no demons, no devil, literaly, then there is no literal demiurge or sophia or
aeons. I understand and appreciate the fact that Gnostics use these myths as metaphors and the fundamentalist
are all together more literal, but still it seems lonely sometimes that there is no Sophia to cry to for wisdom, just
ourselves. I think that my most convenient way of understanding the Gnostic myths is through my only and
literal learned behaviour with orthodox Christianity. I am so sorry to be so confused.
I think the Gnostics tended to see a reality expressed in myth and metaphor to explain the sorrowful condition
we find ourselves in; I obtained this for a website dealing with Valentinan ideas:
"They believed that the experience expressed through the myth was real and that through visionary experiences
(gnosis) and ritual one could experience the events it described. Thus the "myth" is not merely a teaching story.
It is a metaphorical description of the experience of redemption."
As for wisdom not being around, it is there but not to be cried upon; Stevan Davies has to say concerning the
Gospel of Thomas especially in reference to saying 14 that turns completely upside down the traditional
viewpoints of orthodox Christian salvation: "Thomas consistently expresses confidence in the human ability to
discover hidden truth without any direct divine help or intervention. If you rely on divine help through prayer,
or on repentance through fasting, or on obedience through acts of charity, you are going in the wrong direction."
Biserica Adventista de Ziua a Saptea si exprima marturisirea de credinta prin formularea urmatoarelor
27 de doctrine:
1. Revelatia lui Dumnezeu
Revelatia lui Dumnezeu este o reprezentare fidela a ceea ce a dorit sa ne descopere despre sine si se reflecta n
natura (Rom. 1:19-20), n Biblie (Tit 1:3) si n Isus Cristos. Din autenticitatea informatiilor din Biblie, din felul
cum este alcatuita, datorita calitatii de a vorbi fara greseala despre evenimente care urmau sa se ntmple si
datorita puterii de a schimba vietile oamenilor, rezulta cu necesitate ca ea este de sorginte divina.
2. Sfnta Treime
Potrivit adevarurilor explicite si implicite ale Bibliei credem n existenta unui singur Dumnezeu real, detasndune evident de ereziile condamnate la primele patru Concilii Ecumenice. Dumnezeu este de substanta unica
(ousia) si Unul (Deuteronom 6:4; Efeseni 4;5) si se manifesta n trei persoane (hypostasis-uri), Dumnezeu-Tatal,
Dumnezeu-Fiul si Dumnezeu-Spiritul Sfnt.
3. Dumnezeu
Dumnezeu este prima persoana a dumnezeirii, care are viata n sine si care exista prin sine. El ne este descoperit
n Vechiul Testament, n Noul Testament si n mod special n Isus Cristos. El este un Tata al ndurarii, al iubirii,
al rascumpararii si al dreptatii. Sinteza caracterului sau este indicata cel mai reprezentativ n cele zece porunci
(Exod 20) si n iubirea sa aratata n Cristos (Ioan 3:16)
4. Isus Cristos
Isus Cristos este a doua persoana a Dumnezeirii, este preexistenta (Ioan 1:1-3), prin incarnare devine singura
entitate ce uneste divinul cu omenescul n aceeasi persoana, iar acest lucru este realizat de catre Dumnezeire n
vederea rascumpararii creatiei. Divinitatea si umanitatea sa este dovedita de Dumnezeu, de Isus, de prooroci, de
apostoli, de ngeri si chiar de demoni. Isus Cristos este Dumnezeu-Om.

5. Spiritul Sfnt
A treia persoana a Dumnezeirii este Spiritul Sfnt. Atribute ca: vointa, cunoasterea, nazuinta, dragostea,
ntristarea, posibilitatea de a pacatui mpotriva sa, evidentiaza calitatea de persoana, excluznd ideea ca Spiritul
Sfnt este doar o energie. Spiritul Sfnt a participat la creatie cu Tatal si cu Fiul (Gen. 1:2), transforma
caracterul (Ioan 3:5), convinge de pacat (Ioan: 16:8), ne calauzeste n tot adevarul (Ioan 16:13) si conduce
biserica prin darurile spirituale.
6. Originea raului si caderea n pacat
Raul a fost zamislit de catre Lucifer (Isaia 42:12-14), iar formele si rezultatele pe care oamenii le percep se
datoreaza n primul rnd neascultarii lui Adam si a Evei, precum si atasamentului nostru fata de aceasta
neascultare. La acest nivel, istoria raului a nceput n Eden (Gen. 3:16) iar el se identifica cu pacatul, fiind
socotit ca o rebeliune mpotriva lui Dumnezeu.
7. Planul Mntuirii
n ciuda aparitiei pacatului, Dumnezeu nu-si abandoneaza creatia sa si nici nu si-o distruge, ci, datorita dragostei
sale face un plan (Efeseni 1:9-11; 3:9-11), un plan al mntuirii. Acest plan este realizat n Isus Cristos (Faptele
Apostolilor 4:12; Ioan 14:6), cu scopul de a mntui neamul omenesc, de a nlatura discordia din univers si
pentru a glorifica Legea lui Dumnezeu ca o expresie a caracterului sau (Isaia 42:21).
8. Renasterea
Omul poate scapa de efectele finale ale pacatului si poate beneficia de rezultatele planului de mntuire numai n
conditiile n care se naste din nou (Ioan 3:3). Aspectul public al renasterii este botezul, la vrsta adulta, si prin
scufundare n Numele Tatalui si al Fiului si al Sfntului Spirit, iar aspectul launtric al renasterii este pocainta, ce
consta ntr-o schimbare a directiei de mers, o schimbare a gndirii si o adnca parere de rau fata de relele
savrsite precum si parasirea acestora.
9. ndreptatirea prin credinta
Mntuiti sunt doar oamenii pe care Dumnezeu i ndreptateste. Aceasta ndreptatire nu este rezultatul
demersurilor facute de oameni prin fapte bune sau altceva de acest gen. Cei mntuiti sunt ndreptatiti de catre
Dumnezeu n Isus Cristos prin credinta (Romani 3:24). Sfintirea prin credinta si face autentica existenta ntr-o
viata de ascultare fata de Legea Morala a lui Dumnezeu.
10. Decalogul
Legea lui Dumnezeu este apreciata de Biblie (Romani 7:12). Cuvintele pe care Dumnezeu le rosteste in Sinai
(Exod 20) si pe care el nsusi le noteaza pe doua tablite de piatra, constituie cele zece porunci si reprezinta
caracterul lui. Ele obliga pe toti oamenii, indiferent de loc si timp.
11. Sabatul biblic si pseudo-sabatul
Biserica Adventista de Ziua a Saptea se identifica cu sabatul zilei a saptea, adica smbata, nesocotind ca acest
lucru ar constitui un fel de iudaizare. Smbata, ca zi de odihna, este instituita nca din Eden (Gen.2:2-3), face
obiectul scrierii ei pe tabla de piatra chiar de catre Dumnezeu, iar autenticitatea ei este evidentiata fara rezerve
n practica lui Isus Cristos, a Apostolilor si a primilor crestini. Din acest motiv, sfintirea ei constituie o problema
de ascultare de Dumnezeu si n consecinta de moralitate; sarbatorirea altor zile cu caracter de nlocuire a
smbetei, presupune neascultare.
12. Sanctuarul si judecata de cercetare
Sanctuarul construit dupa chipul pe care Dumnezeu i l-a aratat lui Moise este o asezare in imagine concreta a
felului cum are loc lucrarea mntuirii neamului omenesc; iertarea zilnica si iertarea finala, reprezentata prin
Marea Zi a Ispasirii. Potrivit Epistolei catre Evrei, Isus Cristos si-a luat prerogativele de Mare Preot si
savrseste acum n cer, Judecata de cercetare. Aceasta realitate va consemna sfrsitul istoriei pacatului.
13. A doua venire a lui Isus Cristos
Cel mai mare eveniment prezis de Biblie, ce urmeaza sa se ntmple, este revenirea lui Isus Cristos (Ioan
14,2.3). Acest eveniment a fost consemnat si n Crezul crestinismului si continua sa fie speranta tuturor
credinciosilor. Biblia ne asigura ca revenirea sa va fi de dimensiuni cosmice si n consecinta vizibila (Faptele
Apostolilor 1:9-11; Apoc. 1:7). Sunt prevestite semne care preced venirea lui, si acest eveniment este justificat
att de dorinta lui Dumnezeu de a-si mntui pe alesii sai, ct si de faptul ca raul si va fi aratat suficient ceea ce
poate sa ofere. Credem ntr-o revenire certa si iminenta.
14. Natura omului
Starea omului de dupa pacatuire justifica nvierea, judecata si revenirea Mntuitorului. Dupa ce omul moare, nu

exista nici entitate fizica, nici entitate spirituala cu capacitate intelectuala si constienta existentei de sine. Daca
un asemenea lucru ar fi adevarat, cele trei evenimente precizate mai sus nu si-ar avea sensul, si ntreaga Biblie
ar fi fara credit. Omul a fost creat astfel: "Dumnezeu a facut pe om din tarna pamntului, i-a suflat n nari
suflare de viata, si omul s-a facut astfel un suflet viu." (Gen. 2: 7). Cnd omul moare, tarna se ntoarce n
pamnt iar Spiritul de viata la Cel care la dat.
15. Invierea
Isus Cristos este nvierea si viata (Ioan 11:25). In experienta mortii si nvierii sale avem nadejdea ca si noi, chiar
daca va fi sa murim, vom renvia. Biblia ne nvata despre existenta a doua nvieri. O nviere, la a doua revenire
a lui Isus Cristos, a celor care au adormit n el (1 Tesaloniceni 4,16) si a doua nviere a celor nelegiuiti, nviere
ce va avea loc la 1.000 de ani dupa cea dinti (Apocalipsa 20:5.13). Cei dinti vor nvia pentru viata vesnica, iar
ceilalti pentru pedeapsa finala.
16. Spiritismul antic si modern
Din perspectiva Bibliei, satana este socotit ca fiind primul medium spiritist prin sarpele din Eden. n antichitate,
aceasta manifestare s-a dezvoltat si consta n chemarea mortilor, n ghicit, n prezicerea viitorului etc. Nici
lumea moderna nu face exceptie, dat fiind faptul ca aceste practici au devenit extrem de normale pentru o mare
parte din populatia lumii, ntr-o mare varietate religioasa. Biblia condamna aceste practici (Isaia 8:19-20).
Potrivit Bibliei, aceasta forta va reusi sa uneasca lumea n ultima ei atitudine mpotriva lui Dumnezeu.
17. Biserica ramasitei
Ca o antiteza la aceasta alianta universala, va sta biserica lui Dumnezeu (1 Tim. 3:15). n aspect vizibil este
caracterizata de credinta lui Isus, de rabdarea sfintilor si de pazirea poruncilor lui Dumnezeu, iar n aspect
invizibil de toti credinciosii ce vor decide pentru aceasta Biserica n criza finala.
18. Cele trei mesaje angelice
Biserica Crestina Adventista de Ziua a Saptea se identifica cu biserica lui Cristos si si considera ca o datorie
sfnta propovaduirea ntreitei solii ngeresti (Apoc. 14:6-12), adica: evanghelia vesnica, mondiala si culminanta,
sosirea ceasului judecatii, prabusirea confuziilor rezultate din miscarile de unire religioasa si valoarea
determinanta a respingerii nchinarii la fiara si primirea semnului ei.
19. Harul si cele doua legaminte
Nimic din cele mentionate ca atitudini si ca fapta nu platesc mntuirea noastra. nnoirea Vechiului Legamnt n
Cristos ne face beneficiarii Noului Legamnt si n consecinta primitori ai mntuirii acordate prin Har (Efeseni
2:8-9).
20. Spiritul profetiei
Desi la acest nivel exista uneori interpretati tendentioase, Biserica nu promoveaza o altfel de traditie a parintilor
bisericesti pe care o crede autentica n raport cu traditia bisericilor traditionale, respectiv cea Ortodoxa si cea
Romano-Catolica. Pe de alta parte, nu se poate afirma ca scrierile lui Ellen G.White sunt doar scrieri comune.
Datorita puterii lor de a schimba viata oamenilor, datorita puterii lor de a ne ntoarce la Biblie si datorita faptului
ca se identifica cu ceea ce Biblia pretinde pentru calitatea unui profet, gasim n identitatea acestor scrieri,
identitatea unui profet al zilelor noastre.
21. Botezul
Botezul este o marturie publica a celui n cauza, despre credinta sa si despre schimbarea vietii sale. mpreuna cu
Sfnta Cina, constituie pilonii fundamentali ai marturiei crestine cu privire la ceea ce Cristos a ntreprins pentru
oameni n vederea mntuirii. Se administreaza insa doar adultilor, n numele Tatalui, al Fiului si al Spiritului
Sfnt (Matei 28:19).
22. Cina Domnului
Al doilea act de cult comemorativ este mpartasania. Aceasta a fost instituita de catre Isus Cristos (Matei 26:2628) si presupune o pregatire minutioasa a celui n cauza (1 Corintei 11:28). Impartasirea are loc dupa actul
umilintei, spalarea picioarelor, cu pine nedospita si cu vin nefermentat.
23. Ispravnicia crestina
Potrivit Bibliei, fiecare crestin este un adimistrator al bunurilor pe care Dumnezeu i le-a dat n custodie. Astfel,
viata si tot ceea ce are nu i apartin n sens privat, ci doar pentru a fi administrate (1 Corinteni 6:19). n acest
sens fiecare crestin adventist gaseste ca o datorie de onoare sa dea lui Dumnezeu prin Biserica a zecea parte din
veniturile sale (zeciuiala) si alte daruri n raport cu binecuvntarile pe care le primeste din partea cerului.
24. Corpul nostru - un templu

n Biserica Adventista de Ziua a Saptea se da o atentie deosebita trupului uman. Pentru fiecare membru conteaza
ceea ce el este; el este templul Spiritului Sfnt (1 Corinteni 6:19-20), conteaza ceea ce mannca; se consuma
doar alimente pe care Biblia le numeste ca fiind curate (Levitic 11:1-47) si conteaza ceea ce bea sau ceea ce
introduce n corp prin alte metode (injectii, respiratie etc); fara alcool, tutun, cafea, droguri etc.
25. Idealuri crestine
Fiecare membru al Bisericii trebuie sa fie o reprezentare pozitiva a idealurilor crestine. Acest lucru se reflecta n
viata particulara: el este o lumina a lumii (Matei 5:14), n viata publica: promoveaza recrearea nevinovata
(Filipeni 4:4) si detesta placerile vinovate (Prov. 29:14), n viata profesionala: socotesc o cinste n a lectura
cartile cu un continut calitativ ridicat si vad arta ca un dar al lui Dumnezeu atunci cnd aceasta promoveaza
valorile morale umane si n viata de familie: casatoria este o institutie divina la care omul nu are dreptul sa
atenteze: divortul fiind justificat doar n caz de adulter (Matei 19:6; Matei 5:32).
26. Crestinul si autoritatea civila
Autoritatea civila este instituita de Dumnezeu (Romani 13:1; Ioan 19,11). Datorita acestui fapt fiecare
credincios apreciaza rolul acestea si gaseste ca o datorie de onoare respectarea legilor tarii n care locuieste. Pe
de alta parte, atunci cnd o autoritate civila si depaseste atributiile pretinznd ascultare n detrimentul Bibliei,
adica mpotriva poruncilor lui Dumnezeu, fiecare crestin trebuie sa decida n a asculta mai mult de Dumnezeu
dect de oameni (Faptele Apostolilor 5:29).
27. Organizatia n Biserica Adventista de Ziua a Saptea
Urmnd exemplul poporului lui Dumnezeu din Vechiul Testament (Exod 18:17-22) si al crestinismului timpuriu
(Faptele Apostolilor 6:3-5), Biserica crede ca are obligatia sa fie organizata pe principii biblice pentru a putea sa
ndeplineasca lucrarea pe care Dumnezeu i-a ncredintat-o. Astfel, organizarea are la baza doua principii: 1)
principiul comunitatii (Efeseni 2:19-22) si 2) principiul slujbei (Efeseni 4:11-12). Din acestea doua rezulta si
datoriile membrilor.
1.O biserica crestina
In primul rnd, Biserica Crestina Adventista de Ziua a Saptea este o biserica crestina. Increderea n Fiul lui
Dumnezeu ca singur Domn si Mntuitor, crucificat si nviat, este fundamentul marturisirii de credinta. Aceasta i
confera un caracter hristocentric, Isus Cristos fiind centrul vietii si activitatii credinciosilor. "N-am avut de gnd
sa stiu ntre voi altceva dect pe Isus Cristos si pe el rastignit." (1 Corinteni 2:2).
2.O biserica evanghelica
In al doilea rnd, Biserica Crestina Adventista de Ziua a Saptea este o biserica evanghelica. La baza
convingerilor religioase se afla Cuvntul lui Dumnezeu - Biblia - singura sursa normativa de credinta si dogma.
Acest aspect se afla pe linia vechiului principiu protestant "Sola Scriptura" ("Biblia si numai Biblia"). In Biblie
descoperim sursa mntuirii noastre, care ne este oferita n dar, prin credinta n jertfa mntuitoare pe cruce a lui
Isus Cristos.
3.O biserica ce asteapta promisiunea lui Isus ca se va ntoarce pe pamnt
Biserica asteapta revenirea lui Isus Cristos. Acesta este liantul care uneste pe membrii Bisericii Adventiste din
toata lumea. Acesta este raspunsul lui Dumnezeu la nevoile unui pamnt obosit si bolnav. Isus Cristos se va
ntoarce ! "Si dupa ce ma voi duce si va voi pregati un loc, ma voi ntoarce si va voi lua cu mine, ca acolo unde
sunt eu sa fiti si voi". (Ioan 14:3). Chiar numele bisericii tradeaza aceasta speranta de revenire a lui Isus.
Cuvntul adventist deriva de la latinescul advenio care nseamna venire (advento - a se apropia). A fi adventist
nseamna a fi un asteptator activ, militant, al apropiatei revenirii promise de Isus.
4.O biserica care sustine acceptarea integrala a autoritatii Bibliei
Biserica sustine acceptarea integrala a Bibliei, care trebuie respectata si ascultata, fara modificari, fara a scoate,
fara a adauga ceva la textele ei originare. Biserica Adventista sustine obligativitatea respectarii celor 10 porunci,
ca fundament al unei morale crestine sanatoase. Biserica este de Ziua a Saptea , pentru ca n Decalog porunca a
IV-a prevede obligativitatea respectarii Sabatului zilei a 7-a (smbata) ca zi de odihna (Geneza 2:1-3). Niciodata
nu a fost desfiintata vreo porunca din Decalog. Isus Cristos nsusi a spus: "Sa nu credeti ca am venit sa stric
Legea sau Proorocii; am venit nu sa stric, ci sa mplinesc" (Matei 5:17). Odihna Sabatului este raspunsul lui
Dumnezeu la nevoia acuta a omului de odihna, n mijlocul unei lumi stressate si stressante, este binecuvntarea
pe care el este gata sa o ofere astazi.
Episcopii de Roma Calixtus (217-222 d.C.) si Stefanus (254-257 d.C.) au fost cei dinti reprezentanti ai
autoritatilor clerical care au emis pretentia primatului episcopilor de Roma, fata de restul bisericilor crestine din

lume. Dupa parerea lor, episcopii de Roma ar trebui sa fie recunoscuti de intreaga lume crestina drept urmasi de
jure ai apostolului Petru, decedat la Roma. Pretentia se bazeaza pe un text ambiguu din Evanghelia lui Matei
(16,18) si anume discutia lui Isus cu apostolul Petru in localitatea Caesarea-Philippi din nordul Palestinei (azi:
Banjas, Israel), cu ncredintarea cheii simbolice succesorale: Si eu iti spun: tu esti Petru (joc de cuvinte: kephaspetrus = stnca-piatra) si pe aceasta piatra voiu zidi ecclesia mea (ecclesia = adunare, nu biserica in sensul
ulterior interpretat) (cuvntul biserica vine de la cuvntul latin basilica = templu, lacas de cult la Romani).
Ambiguitatea textului a constituit unul din motivele pentru care bisericile ortodocse si reformate nu au
recunoscut niciodata primatul papei de la Roma. Marii teologi ai secolelor 2-3 au acceptat, ce-i drept, rolul
deosebit al apostolului Petru la Roma, dar au pledat pentru idea egalitatii in drepturi a tuturor episcopilor din
vest si a patriarhilor din est. La Conciliul Ecumenic de la Niceea (325 d.C.) s-a recunoscut egalitatea celor patru
episcopate si patriarhate din lumea crestina: Roma (Italia), Alexandria (Egipt), Ierusalim (Palestina) si Antiochia
(Turcia). In anul 375 d.C. episcopul de Roma Damasus I (366-384 d.C.) s-a pronuntat din nou pentru primatul
episcopului de Roma, pe baza aceluiasi argument ambiguu din Evanghelia lui Matei (16,18), ridicnd de la sine
putere episcopatul din Roma la rangul de Scaun Apostolic. In anul 383 d.C. s-a produs dezmembrarea
Imperiului Roman in 2 parti: partea de vest (cu capitala Roma) si partea de est (cu capitala Constantinopol).
Titulatura Scaun Apostolic pentru episcopul de Roma a fost recunoscuta imediat de imparatul partii de vest a
imperiului (Theodosius, 383-395). Episcopul de Roma (Siricius, 384-399) a emis in consecinta Decretalia
constituta, prin care a fundamentat primatul episcopilor de Roma. Episcopul Leo I (440-461) a fost primul Papa.
Imparatul partii de vest a imperiului (Valentinians III, 425-455) a confirmat oficial printr-un edict in anul 445
asa-zisul Primat al episcopilor de Roma, dar numai pentru tarile vestice (Italia, Spania, Franta de sud, Africa de
nord). In anul 451, Papa Leo I a protestat contra hotarrii Conciliului ecumenic de la Calcedon, in care episcopii
de Roma si de Constantinopol au fost egal ndreptatiti in chestiunile religioase. Dupa aceasta data, a inceput
lupta pentru putere si pentru impartirea sferelor de influenta si ntietate in lumea crestina intre cei 2 sefi ai
bisericilor de vest (Roma) si de est (Constantinopol), lupta continuata pna in zilele de azi. Papa Symmachus
(498-514) a decretat prin ordonanta Constitutum silvestri ca detinatorii Scaunului Apostolic din Roma nu pot fi
judecati si condamnati de catre oamenii obisnuiti. Papa Gregor I (590-604) a extins influenta episcopatului de
Roma si in sfera treburilor politice, la inceput in Italia, apoi in intreaga lume, aprofundnd si mai mult
discrepanta si nentelegerile dintre bisericile de vest si de est. La Sinodul local din Whitby (Anglia, 664) Roma
a repetat din nou pretentia suprematiei sale fata de Constantinopol. La Conciliul ecumenic de la Constantinopol
din anul 680 s-a combatut pretentia primatului papal, o mare parte din participanti declarndu-se pentru
egalitatea tuturor episcopilor si patriarhilor. Papa Stefan II (752-757) a intemeiat primul stat religios din lume
(Patrimonium Petri) cu sediul la Roma, indepartndu-se prin aceasta si mai mult de bisericile de est. Un
dezacord grav intre cele 2 biserici concurente (vest si est) s-a produs in anul 863, in timpul procesului intentat
de biserica catolica vestica patriarhului estic ortodox Photius. In secolele 10-11 a avut loc ncrestinarea
majoritatii populatiei ruse. Biserica rusa s-a subordonat imediat Patriarhatului ortodox de la Constantinopol.
Papa Leo IX (1049-1054) si patriarhul de Constantinopol Michael Cerularius (1004-1058) au determinat ruptura
definitiva dintre cele 2 biserici in anul 1054, in urma unor dezacorduri ireconciliabile (lupta pentru suprematie
in lumea crestina, divergente teologice etc). Aceasta ruptura a ramas cunoscuta in istorie sub numele de Marea
Schisma. Bisericile de est ortodocse s-au declarat biserici autocefale dupa Marea Schisma, patriarhul de
Constantinopol fiind considerat de aici incolo de catre bisericile estice drept sef al bisericii ortodoxe. In anul
1589, insa, patriarhul bisericii ortodoxe ruse din Moscova a pretins, la rndul sau, preluarea rolului conducator
al bisericilor ortodocse din intreaga lume, ceace a dus la noi complicatii. Biserica ortodoxa recunoaste numai
primele 7 Concilii ecumenice crestine, respinge primatul si institutia papala, are o liturghie proprie si cultul
icoanelor. Aceasta biserica sustine ca e singura care ar fi pastrat neschimbate dealungul secolelor dogmele,
traditia, cultul si organizarea bisericii crestine, asa cum au fost in primele 8 secole dupa Isus. Denumirea
Ortodoxie s-a impus definitiv dupa Marea Schisma din 1054. Bisericile ortodocse se conduc dupa principiul
ierarhic sinodal, alcatuind biserici regionale, autocefale si autonome. Biserica ortodoxa romna s-a declarat
autocefala in 1864 (in anul 1925 a devenit Patriarhie).
sfrunza@yahoo.com

Aspecte ale raportului dintre filosofie si esoterism n intepretarea lui Moshe Idel
Abstract: This text deals with Moshe Idel's perspective on the connections between Maimonide's philosophy
and Abulafia's esoteric thought. Idel analyses their thinking under the aspect of their appearance, inter-relation,
and inner dynamics. Idel's analysis reveals that Maimonide's attempt to issue an esoteric book, one that would
give back to Judaism a lost esoteric science, gave a particular impulse to the development of Jewish mysticism,
and especially to the ecstatic Kabbalah. Maimonide attempted to transform philosophy into a mystic instrument
of understanding the secrets of the Torah. This fact determined Abulafia to re-signify the Maimonidean thought
and to integrate it into a limit experience of "unio mystica". In this context, several aspects concerning the
arcanization and the super-arcanization of philosophical and mystical texts are discussed.
Filosofia si arcanizarea ei
Vom ncerca sa urmarim un aspect important n ceea ce priveste relatiile dintre filosofie si gndirea esoterica, n
speta cea a cabalei, ntr-un moment care pare sa privilegieze o reconstructie semnificativa a acestui raport.
Pentru aceasta ne vom opri mpreuna cu Moshe Idel asupra unui moment decisiv n ntlnirea dintre filosofie si
misticism. Moshe Idel ne atrage atentia asupra unei ntlniri definitorii pentru acest raport cea dintre
Maimonide, fondatorul aristotelismului evreiesc, si exegetii sai. n secolul al treisprezecelea n Spania se
constata un efort special de redefinire a esotericului prin trecerea de la studiul filosofic al Ghidului ratacitilor, la
o suita larga si variata de interpretari care pun n lumina dezvoltarea diferitor forme de cabala. O parte a
cabalistilor spanioli au interpretat opera lui Maimonide ca pe o sursa filosofica ce trebuie privita ntr-o maniera
mai profunda, utiliznd modalitatile specifice de abordare oferite de cabala. Ei propun o lectura secreta a
Ghidului ratacitilor, pe care Maimonide nsusi o declara drept o opera esoterica1. Procesul de secretizare a unei
opere care este prin ea nsasi esoterica este numit de Moshe Idel supra-arcanizare, iar secretizarea unei opere n
general este numita arcanizare2.
Complexitatea raporturilor pe care filosofia le ntretine cu gndirea mistica, si n special cu cabala, este nfatisata
de Moshe Idel prin trei pozitii exemplare ale unor gnditori care ncearca sa explice emergenta misticii evreiesti
si sa lamureasca implicatiile pe care le au raporturile dezvoltate ntre Maimonide si cabala. O prima perspectiva
adusa n discutie este cea afirmata de Graetz, n viziunea caruia cabala este o doctrina cu origine straina, ce nu
are o baza preexistenta n traditia iudaica si care a aparut ca o reactie la gndirea rationalista a lui Maimonide si
a succesorilor sai3. O alta conceptie, mai aporpiata de cea asumata de Moshe Idel este cea a lui David Neumark,
care vede n cabala o gndire evreiasca autentica, ce nvinge ntr-o confruntare dialectica de lunga durata cu
filosofia. Nasterea misticismului evreiesc, cabala, apare astfel ca o reactie la ascensiunea filosofiei evreiesti asa
cum este ea expusa n Ghidul ratacitilor4. Cabalistii par sa iasa nvingatori din aceasta controversa, ceea ce duce
la un moment de declin al gndirii filosofice. Maimonide apare n aceasta interpretare ca filosoful ce marcheaza
sfrsitul perioadei clasice, n care domina gndirea filosofica. Ar fi vorba, asadar de o trecere de la gndirea
filosofica clasica la cabala clasica5. Evaluarile critice ale lui Moshe Idel conduc la concluzia ca o pozitie care
face abstractie de filosofia maimonidiana n procesul dezvoltarii cabalei este cea a lui Scholem. Scholem
considera ca trendul mistic al cabalei s-a nascut la interferenta dintre gnosticism, transmis n cercurile evreiesti
de-a lungul secolelor, si neoplatonismul filosofic asa cum apare el n versiuni medievale. Fara sa excluda un
posibil impact al controversei n jurul operelor lui Maimonide asupra dezvoltarii cabalei, Scholem considera ca
aceasta dezbatere are mai degraba o influenta secundara6.
Moshe Idel aduce doua corective celor trei tipuri de abordari mentionate. Pe de o parte, afirma ca nu putem face
abstractie de existenta unui material precabalistic n traditia iudaica si chiar n textele iudaice clasice. Acesta nu
era de natura gnostica, ci, dimpotriva, exista suficiente indicii ca ar fi putut chiar avea influente asupra
materialului simbolic vehiculat de gnosticism. Pe de alta parte, i se pare dincolo de orice ndoiala faptul ca
interpretarea filosofica rationalista si naturalista a temelor esoterismului iudaic este cea care declanseaza n mod
decisive critica virulenta ndreptata mpotriva lui Maimonide7.
Exegetii lui Maimonide, printre care si Moshe Halbertal, evidentiaza preocuparile pentru esoteric ale lui
Maimonide. Acesta avea la dispozitie doua tipuri de practica a cunoasterii ezoterice. O metoda de scriere
ezoterica, n care prin intermediul parabolelor si al cuvintelor echivoce snt transmise cunostinte si o tehnica
orala, de transmitere a titlurilor capitolelor Ghidului ratacitilor catre o persoana initiata. Halbertal constata ca
spre a fi n concordanta cu prevederile traditiei, care spun ca despre astfel de lucruri nu se poate vorbi n
prezenta a doua persoane, Maimonide si construieste cartea n forma tesaturii unor scrisori catre ucenicul sau,

conjurnd cititorul sa pastreze ascunse secretele Ghidului8.

Halbertal constata ca Maimonide refuza sa se situeze n continuitatea vreunei traditii n ceea ce priveste
transmiterea sensului ascuns. Spre deosebire de cabalisti, care circumscriu descrierea secretelor Torei ca parte a
unei traditii stravechi, spre a evita orice controverse si rivalitati, filosoful afirma ca traditia ezoterica a
fost uitata si ca el ncearca nu sa o redescopere, ci sa o recompuna. Maimonide afirma, totodata, ca o data cu
moartea sa aceasta stiinta esoterica este destinata sa devina, la rndul sau, parte a unei traditii ezoterice pierdute.
Totusi, Moshe Halbertal arata, cu gravitate dar si cu ironie, ca pentru a nu lasa sa moara aceasta traditie,
Maimonide ncalca restrictiile cu privire la pastrarea secretelor ascunse si le mpartaseste unui singur initiat.
Lumea sensului unic n care Maimonide recuprereaza si transmite sensurile ezoterice este descrisa de Halbertal
n felul urmator: tarmul ezotericului faciliteaza integrarea a doua lumi aparent contradictorii sensul revelat al
Scripturilor si contextul filosofic si stiintific n care se situeaza persoana ratacita. Aceasta contradictie este
solutionata prin cercetarea sistematica a nivelului profund al textului, care incorporeaza problematici filosofice
si stiintifice"9.
Aceasta pendulare ntre esoteric si stiintific, ntre arcanizarea traditiei iudaice si explicarea sa rationala
declanseaza critici acerbe la adresa modului de filosofare propus de Maimonide.
Cum se explica faptul ca filosofia lui Maimonide se afla n mijlocul unei att de puternice controverse, desi era
un halahist de mare eruditie, si un filosof cu o exprimare precisa?10 Raspunsul lui Moshe Idel releva noutatea
radicala pe care interpretarea aristotelica o dadea iudaismului. Nimeni din cercurile filosofice evreiesti ale
vremii nu parea capabil sa sustina conceptii de natura celor expuse de Maimonide. Reinterpretarea rationalista a
traditiei ebraice facuta de Maimonide i apare lui Moshe Idel ca o ruptura neta11 ce strneste o multitudine de
critici, iar "aceasta reactie a fost catalizatorul principal al cristalizarii cabalei initiale"12. Datorita rupturii pe
care o produce, conceptia maimonidiana este perceputa ca una revolutionara. O atitudine radicala a lui
Maimonide este socotita faptul ca filosoful medieval este primul care are curajul de a intra
ntr-o opozitie deschisa cu operele fundamentale ale vechiului misticism iudaic, justificnd ca traditia evreiasca
autentica a fost pierduta. El exprima convingerea ca, prin intermediul filosofiei lui Aristotel si a interpretarilor
medievale ale gndirii acestuia, ar fi descoperit semnificatia autentica a esoterismului ebraic. Avnd n vedere
extraordinara autoritate a lui Maimonide, reactiile nu au ntrziat sa apara. Pastratorii traditiei esoterice stravechi
au declansat atitudini dintre cele mai variate si au propus exegeze multiple ce au dus n cele din urma la
constituirea curentului medieval al cabalei13.
Analiznd modul de raportare al misticilor fata de filosofie, Idel ajunge la convingerea ca nu filosofia ca atare
este respinsa de cabalisti, ci doar ncercarea filosofilor de a substitui interpretarea esoterica cu una rationala de
tip aristotelic. Preocuparea lor esentiala era aceea de a afirma diferenta si chiar opozitia ntre exegeza de tip
filosofic si cea traditional evreiasca14. n cazul concret al raportarii la gndirea lui Maimonide era vorba n
primul rnd de o critica a "esoterismului maimonidian" de pe pozitiile esoterismului traditional.
Cabala promoveaza n acest context, o controversa ponderata" ntre aspectele rationalizatoare si mistice n
iudaism. Idel o numeste ponderata deoarece nu a fost promovata o critica destructiva deschisa, ci mai degraba a
avut loc o reconstructie teoretica ce reprezenta o alternativa bazata pe o traditie ndelung dezvoltata si
consacrata15.
Putem observa n aceasta dezbatere de idei un efort de arcanizare a traditiei iudaice prezent n opera lui
Maimonide. n acelasi timp, o parte semnificativa a traditiei mistice realizeaza n mod sistematic o
supraarcanizare a gndirii lui Maimonide, n special a filosofiei dezvoltata n cuprinsul Ghidului ratacitilor ce se
dorea nca de la nceput o carte esoterica. n felul acesta, filosofia devine un instrument mistic de cunoastere,
chiar n conditiile n care ea este practicata
n limbajul rationalist al aristotelismului arab si evreiesc. Totodata, gnditori de prima mna din contextul cabalei
dezvolta o doctrina mistica n limbajul aristotelic propus de Maimonide, transformnd mistica ntr-un mod de
filosofare si de cunoastere a lui Dumnezeu, pe baza continuitatii unei traditii stravechi, si dnd filosofiei propriul
ei drept la existenta de sine.
Maimonide si filosofia ca dimensiune esoterica
Prin sublinierea proceselor de arcanizare pe care le realizeaza cabalistii asupra Ghidului ratacitilor, Idel ncearca
sa evidentieze ca demarcatiile ntre filosofie si misticism snt tot att de neclare n iudaism, cum snt si n alte
religii. Exista multi cabalisti care considera cabala ca fiind filosofia interioara16. Asa cum pentru Maimonide
filosofia este menita sa pastreze ascunse secretele inaccesibile maselor si sa faca accesibil esotericul doar unei

elite. Este motivul pentru care Maimonide relateaza ca Ghidul ratacitilor este o carte ezoterica si ca ea se
adreseaza doar celor care au ajuns pe o anumita treapta de initiere n taina textelor sacre. Metoda de interpretare
alegorica pare sa fie n acest caz singura capabila sa ierarhizeze diferitele niveluri de ntelegere a textelor n
functie de cititorul caruia i se adreseaza.
Analiznd aceasta ierarhizare a transmiterii cunoasterii, Moshe Halbertal constata ca la Maimonide apare nu
numai distinctia ntre o elita si masele largi, ci si o diviziune n cadrul elitei, ntre elita traditionala ce
interpreteaza legea si Talmudul si elita ce are acces la nvatatura esoterica a Torei. n felul acesta, Maimonide
postuleaza existenta unei elite careia i este accesibil ezotericul. Ea are menirea de a facilita integrarea culturala
prin ncorporarea n explicatiile experientei religioase a unor conceptii filosofice, care nu reprezinta nimic
altceva dect dimensiunea esoterica a Torei. Aceasta stratificare a elitelor si a maselor si pune amprenta si
asupra teoriei cu privire la limbaj. Existenta unui dublu sens este corelata de Halbertal cu existenta unui dublu
limbaj care face posibila adresarea, prin intermediul acelorasi cuvinte, unor tipuri de public diferite. Cercetarea
conceptiei esoterice a lui Maimonide scoate la iveala faptul ca tocmai notiunea de esoterism, limitele si
argumentele sale si au sursa n acelasi cadru cultural caruia i atribuie Maimonide propria sa nvatatura
ezoterica. Mai precis, Maimonide considera doctrina ezoterica drept o unealta care transgreseaza traditia si
similitudinile aristotelice musulmane; mai mult dect att, ntreaga sa conceptie ezoterica si argumentarea
ncadrarii acesteia n traditia iudaica snt vazute n termeni de traditie filosofica", scrie Halbertal17.
Aceasta traditie este rationala pentru ca este mistica. Actul filosofarii este tot att de important ca si filosofia
nsasi deoarece discursul rational aplicat traditiei iudaice presupune o practica esoterica de decriptare, dar si de
ascundere a secretelor traditiei. Filosofia tine astfel de practica ce ne orienteaza n lumea secretului si a
secretizarii (arcanizarii).
Istoricii ideilor l plaseaza pe Maimonide n contextul cultural al filosofiei arabe unde exista un tip de reflectie
numita falsafah, iar adeptii ei erau numiti faylasufs. Ei credeau ca rationalismul aducea forma celei mai nalte
religii si propunea o notiune de Dumnezeu mai desavrsita dect cea a dumnezeului revelat n scripturi18.
Karen Armstrong situeaza convingerea maimonidiana ca religia iudaica este ntemeiata pe principii rationale
ferme sub influenta acestei filosofii, ndeosebi n forma oferita de Ibn Rushd sau Averroes19. Analizele lui
Maurice-Ruben Hayoun20 se concentreaza si ele pe aceasta tendinta a lui Maimonide de a reformula n termeni
filosofici natura revelatiei iudaice, prelund n mod critic filosofia lui Aristotel cu intentia de a pune n echilibru
datul traditional si revelat cu datul filosofic si revelat. ntregul efort maimonidian are la baza convingerea ca
aristotelismul reprezinta forma desavrsita a gndirii. Pornind de aici, gnditorul evreu depune eforturi sustinute
de a ajunge la o convergenta ntre comentariul alegoric si interpretarea filosofica a traditiilor evreiesti. Nu
ntmplator Maurice-Ruben Hayoun afirma ca Maimonide are o idee filosofica despre Dumnezeu si i sacrifica
multe pasaje biblice ce nu se potriveau cu ea",21 n ciuda afirmatiei ca filosofia nu poate sa ajunga la date
contrare revelatiei deoarece filosofia si religia au o finalitate comuna. Acest raport strns ntre filosofie si religie
i pune pe exegeti n dificultate atunci cnd ncearca sa distinga n mod clar n gndirea lui Maimonide
fundamentele filozofice de cele teologice: el a mbinat foarte strns datul rational cu cel traditional sau revelat
Hotart sa faca din iudaism o religie luminata, Maimonide a sapat adnc la temelia ambelor categorii, ale
revelatiei si ratiunii, spre a ajunge sa demonstreze ca ele se confunda, constituind pna la urma o entitate"22.
Exegetii scrierilor maimonidiene, si n special cei ai Ghidului ratacitilor, releva credinta lui Maimonide, pe de o
parte, ca filosofia reprezinta o parte ezoterica a credintei iudaice si ea trebuie dezvaluita doar unei elite
filosofice. Pe de alta parte, interpretarea alegorica a scripturilor trebuia promovata pentru oamenii de rnd, spre
a-i ajuta sa nu cada n antropomorfism atunci cnd se raporteaza la Dumnezeu si chiar pentru a avea accesul la
nemurire. Maimonide este cel care, pentru prima oara n gndirea iudaica, ajunge sa fixeze un set de reguli, un
cod de 13 articole de credinta care sa asigure acel minim de cunoastere" la care trebuie sa ajunga orice adept al
iudaismului. Aceasta marturisire de credinta" expusa n Comentariu la Misna ar cuprinde: "1) existenta lui
Dumnezeu, 2) Unitatea lui Dumnezeu; 3) Noncorporalitatea lui Dumnezeu; 4) Eternitatea lui Dumnezeu; 5)
Interdictia de a sluji altor Dumnezei; 6) Existenta profetiei; 7) Moise a fost cel mai mare dintre profeti; 8)
originea divina a Torei, 9) Validitatea eterna a Torei; 10) Dumnezeu cunoaste faptele oamenilor; 11) El i judeca
pe oameni potrivit acestora; 12) Dumnezeu va trimite un Mesia; 13) nvierea mortilor". Stabilirea unui
asemenea set de credinte corecte" duce la un dogmatism care nu a existat niciodata n traditia anterioara lui
Maimonide. Este si motivul pentru care, n ciuda autoritatii exercitata de gndirea sa n secolele urmatoare, nu a
reusit sa se impuna ca atare nici n epoca si nici mai trziu. Acest dogmatism religios este perceput ca ceva cu

totul strain, inexplicabil si incompatibil cu traditia hermeneutica a iudaismului. Julius Guttmann pune acest
dogmatism pe seama intelectualismului filosofic practicat de Maimonide23.
Intelectualismului filosofic practicat n Ghidul ratacitilor viza depasirea credintei religioase naive si
mbratisarea unor convingeri religioase rationale, care sa antreneze metodele riguroase ale logicii si ale
discursului de tip stiintific. De aceea, Zev Harvey subliniaza faptul ca nu e deloc ntmplator ca Ghidul
ratacitilor se constituie ca o adresare a lui Maimonide catre un student care ramne perplex n fata constatarii
existentei unui conflict ntre iudaism si stiinta sau filosofie. Deoarece acest context oferea lui Maimonide un
bun prilej sa desfasoare o larga argumentatie n sprijinul ideii ca prin ntelegerea solidaritatii reciproce dintre
legea divina si cercetarea rationala poti sa rami fidel deopotriva bibliei si traditiei iudaice, pe de o parte, si
stiintei si filosofiei, pe de alta parte24.
Reflectiile lui Maimonide au strnit o mare varietate de interpretari.
Urmnd structura argumentativa a filosofului medieval, Maurice-Ruben Hayoun constata ca trairea dumnezeului
personal a lui Avraam se sterge progresiv
n favoarea conceptului de divinitate, a dumnezeului filosofilor. Aceasta nu implica nsa vreo diminuare a
credintei sau religiozitatii, deoarece potrivit lui Maimonide putem iubi doar ceea ce cunoastem, iar cunoasterea
presupune sa studiem Fizica si Metafizica lui Aristotel25.
Dintr-un unghi diferit este abordat Maimonide de Moshe Halbertal, care subliniaza importanta si rolul
dimensiunii esoterice. Halbertal arata dublul rol al ezoterismului n corelatie cu viata sociala si politica. Pe de o
parte, dndu-i filosofului posibilitatea de a-si formula opiniile ntr-un limbaj dual accesibil doar celor initiati26,
ezoterismul l protejeaza pe filosof si filosofia sa de batjocura multimilor care nu l pot ntelege apara
filosoful de mna de fier a autoritatii religioase, care l considera distructiv si periculos". Pe de alta parte,
ezoterismul protejeaza pe cei din multime ntr-un proces de tainuire deoarece expunerea la filosofie a vulgului
sau a oricaror persoane neinitiate n procesul stiintific educational i va conduce pe acestia catre pierderea
credintei, din moment ce vor fi incapabili sa nteleaga adevarul si, prin urmare, l vor distorsiona"27.
Esoterismul apare astfel ca o bariera n calea demistificarii"28.
O pozitie ce priveste fenomenul n ntreaga sa complexitate este cea adoptata de Moshe Idel. Desi vorbeste
despre Maimonide ca despre creatorul aristotelismului evreiesc, Moshe Idel considera ca filosoful scrie ntr-o
maniera criptica, ntr-un stil platonician, asupra unor subiecte aristotelice, pe care le proiecteaza n categoriile
rabinice ale gndirii esoterice"29.
Interesul lui Moshe Idel este ndreptat spre un Maimonide care ofera un cadru pentru dezvoltarea unei filosofii a
naturii si a unei metafizici neoaristotelice, marcata de cteva influente neoplatonice, care servesc ca un punct de
plecare pentru o intensificare a vietii religioase ce duce n cele din urma la o experienta mistica30.
Critica gndirii maimonidiene si recuperarea esotericului n gndirea cabalei
Afirmatiile privind moartea traditiei esoterice si utilizarea filosofiei ca instrument esoteric de catre Maimonide
nu putea sa nu ntmpine critici dintre cele mai nuantate. Atentia lui Idel se ndreapta spre o critica deschisa cum
este cea a lui Nahmanide, care evidentiaza existenta unei traditii transmisa "gura catre gura", accesibila doar
celor mai piosi dintre evrei. Se constata astfel existenta unor secrete ce nu pot fi deduse nici din textul biblic si
nici nu pot fi identificate cu motive din opera lui Aristotel sau supuse interpretarii filosofice, care are pentru
cabalisti "aparenta artei magice si a vrajitoriei"31. Pe acest fond, Moshe Idel constata o dezvoltare a traditiei
esoterice determinata de reactia pe care o au cabalistii fata de ncercarea de a inventa o alternativa la esoterismul
antic. Ei erau convinsi ca orice legitimare poate fi conferita doar de interpretarea traditionala. Prin urmare,
"divulgarea traditiei autentice" reprezenta n opinia lor cel mai bun antidot la eroarea intelectuala a lui
Maimonide"32.
Desi n centrul controversei dintre perspectiva maimonidiana si cea a cabalistilor stau temele esoterice legate de
"relatarea Carului sau relatarea Genezei", divergentele perspectivale au o paleta foarte larga. Una dintre
dezbaterile careia Moshe Idel i acorda o importanta deosebita este cea n jurul comandamentelor. Moshe Idel
arata ca n viziunea cabalistilor comandamentele trebuie integrate unei viziuni holistice, n care acestea snt
corelative sefirotilor. Astfel, orice punere n discutie a structurii teosofice atrage dupa sine diminuarea
semnificatiei profunde a comandamentelor. Acestia ofera o interpretare teurgica n care nu numai ca se afirma o
corespondenta ntre lumea sefirotilor si cele 613 comandamente, ci se vorbeste si de o practica teurgica n care
comandamentele snt concepute ca instrumente ale puterii pe care cabalistii o au n a influenta dinamica divina.
Moshe Idel ne aminteste faptul ca ideea centrala n hermeneutica teurgica este ca activitatea umana poate sa

produca schimbari n domeniul divinului, al supranaturalului. Pe o asemenea convingere se dezvolta o ntreaga

literatura de interpretare esoterica a comandamentelor divine. Moshe Idel acorda o importanta sporita n
emergenta si dezvoltarea acestor doctrine raportului mai mult sau mai putin critic sau explicit pe care acesti
cabalisti l ntretin cu interpretarea rationala a lui Maimonide, pe care o considera ca provenind din surse straine
de gndirea iudaica.
Evalund aceasta polemica, Moshe Idel arata ca "aparitia istorica a textelor cabalistice n Provence si n Spania
este partial un raspuns dat de teologii evrei, aflati n posesia mai vechilor traditii esoterice, la afirmatia lui
Maimonide conform careia esoterismul evreiesc este constituit din adevaruri rationale... Operele sistematice ale
lui Maimonide, care presupun ca traditiile esoterice evreiesti au fost pierdute si ca el le-a redescoperit, i-au
obligat pe cabalisti sa cristalizeze elementele traditiilor esoterice pe care le cunosteau si sa le reformuleze ntrun sistem mai coerent. Acest sistem, care este n general o interpretare teosofico-teurgica a surselor evreiesti
clasice, nu a acceptat niciodata teologia lui Maimonide, sau conceptia sa asupra comandamentelor"33.
nsa, chiar printre cabalisti, si cu att mai mult n curente diferite ale cabalei, ntlnim o multitudine de atitudini
si interpretari. Adept al nuantelor, Moshe Idel arata ca, n timp ce cabala teozofica si teurgica tradeaza un tip de
mentalitate religioasa profund diferita de cea a lui Maimonide, cabala extatica prezinta o strucutra intelectuala si
o relatie diferita n raport cu gndirea "marelui vultur". Ca atitudine exemplara n aceasta orientare, Moshe Idel
ne ofera atitudinea lui Abraham Abulafia, pentru care studiul textelor cabalei reprezenta o etapa de trecere
dinspre gndirea filosofica nspre experienta mistica. Cabala limbajului si Ghidul ratacitilor al lui Maimonide
snt temelia pe care Abulafia va construi edificiul cabalei extatice. Potrivit lui Moshe Idel, Abulafia se afla n
fata a doua maniere de studiu al Ghidului: una care ia n calcul existenta unei dimensiuni cabalistice n opera lui
Maimonide; si o alta, specifica succesorilor filosofului, care i atribuie propriile lor conceptii, dnd astfel o
proasta ntelegere a filosofiei maestrului. Abulafia a optat pentru cea dinti metoda si a construit o interpretare a
Ghidului prin prisma elementelor care fac din acesta o opera cabalistica. O afinitate cu aceasta metoda de
interpretare observa Moshe Idel n cazul lui Gikatilla, ucenicul lui Abulafia, care releva o dubla posibilitate de
valorizare a Ghidului ratacitilor: n perspectiva unei interpretari metaforice valide a Bibliei sau a unei perceptii
de tip cabalistic mai elaborate. Pentru Moshe Idel, acceptarea existentei a doua cai de interpretare a Ghidului
ratacitilor poate fi corelata cu cele doua atitudini divergente: cea a cabalei teosofico-teurgice care considera ca
avem de a face cu o opera suspecta care are implicatii periculoase; si cea a lui Abulafia care credea ca o
descifrare tot mai adecvata a exegezei maimonidiene a textului biblic conduce la ntelegerea sensului spiritual al
Ghidului ratacitilor, care releva caracterul sau cabalistic. n acest fel, textul maimonidian este vazut ca un
intermediar care "permite spiritului uman sa treaca de la perceptia simplista a unui text la o experienta
spirituala"34. n cazul lui Abulafia, Moshe Idel propune "o conceptie care vede n Ghid o etapa necesara pentru
elevarea sufletului uman de la un tip "simplist" de religie, bazata pe o ntelegere simpla a textului biblic, pna la
o religie "filosofica", ce alegorizeaza aspectele nefilosofice ale religiei si n cele din urma la o religie mistica
eliberatoare, ce vizeaza un "misionarism" extatic si uneori chiar experiente de unio mystica"35.
n cazul de fata termenul "mistica" este corelat de autor cu un efort uman ce vizeaza realizarea unei experiente
spirituale. n analizele lui Moshe Idel la textele lui Abulafia ne retin atentia cele doua "chei ale inteligentei": una
propusa de Maimonide prin exegeza alegorica, si o alta care vizeaza gnoza numelui divin nteles ca o
chintesenta a ntregii substante lingvistice. Ele necesita o metoda toraica specifica de interpretare. O asemenea
metoda presupune combinarea literelor si a secretelor lor si poate duce la atingerea nivelului iluminarii prin
intermediul Intelectului agent. Astfel, metoda toraica lingvistica este si o tehnica mistica ce implica experienta
unei relatii speciale ntre subiectul experientei si entitatile superioare. Idel constata ca, urmnd o asemenea
metoda, Abulafia se considera a fi comentatorul perfect al lui Maimonide deoarece reusise sa mbine mostenirea
esoterica a textelor acestuia cu experimentarea revelationala a interpretarii lor36.
Din analizele lui Moshe Idel putem constata ca n formularea doctrinei sale privind "unio mystica", Abulafia
foloseste o terminologie maimonidiana: "fuziunea totala dintre intelectul uman si cel divin este exprimata prin
intermediul principiului aristotelic conform caruia, n momentul procesului cognitiv, cunoscatorul se identifica
n totalitate cu ceea ce este cunoscut" 37.
Raportarea pozitiva a lui Abulafia fata de Maimonide este perceputa ca fiind o contributie importanta la
cultivarea unei atitudini pozitive fata de opera acestuia n rndurile reprezentantilor cabalei extatice. nsa, Moshe
Idel afirma ca desi terminologia celui mai important cabalist al acestei scoli este una maimonidiana, totusi,
influenta lui Maimonide si pierde treptat impactul asupra acestui curent al cabalei. Idel fixeaza rolul lui

Maimonide sub doua unghiuri de incidenta diferite. Maimonide apare n cazul cabalei teosofico-teurgice doar ca
un reper n raport cu care traditia esoterica se structureaza, printr-o situare alternativa n fata unui mod strain de
gndire. n cazul cabalei extatice impactul gndirii maimonidiene este unul de profunzime; snt afectate aici att
limbajul ct si semnificatiile de profunzime ale viziunilor formulate de aceasta scoala de gndire.
Ca o atitudine generala, nsa, Moshe Idel constata ca n cazul gnditorilor mistici care si ncep activitatea
intelectuala sub influenta lui Maimonide, putem sesiza o tendinta treptata de a se ndreapta spre speculatia
teosofica sau neoplatonica, cultivnd o atitudine critica deschisa fata de aristotelismul maimonidian.
Cele doua atitudini diferite fata de Maimonide snt pentru Moshe Idel rezultatul afirmarii a doua tipuri diferite
de metafizica: gndirea teosofica era preocupata de natura celor 10 sefiroti, situati dincolo de cele 10 intelecte
separate care jucau un rol central n metafizica maimonidiana; gndirea teosofica respinge metafizica lui
Maimonide considernd ca filosofia aristotelica vizeaza un domeniu care este inferior lumii sefirotice.
Raporturile ambigue ce se instituie ntre diverse scoli de gndire medievala, si n special ntre filosofie si
gndirea religioasa, snt ilustrate de Idel cu gndirea lui Abulafia. El este un adept al gndirii extatice care se
simte foarte apropiat de Maimonide, desi prin resemnificarile spirituale, mistice, ale schemei aristotelice se
ndeparteza de metafizica acestuia. Locul pe care l ocupa filosofia putea fi revelat de faptul ca aristotelismul
medieval maimonidian era n primul rnd un sistem descriptiv, care propunea "lucrarile lui Aristotel ca fiind
textele principale ale unui curriculum ideal, al carui scop este o percepere indirecta a atributelor lui Dumnezeu
prin intermediul contemplarii naturii."38 Modul n care cabalistii utilizau filosofia pentru a recupera esoterismul
ca dat al traditiei este evidentiat de doctrina lui Abulafia, care era prescriptiva si aducea "tehnici elaborate ce
permit obtinerea experientelor mistice nca n aceasta viata, experiente care, desi snt clar non-maimonidiene,
pot fi ntelese n termeni maimonidieni" 39.
Arcanizare si experienta profetica la Abraham Abulafia
Desi Maimonide utilizeaza esoterismul n opera sa, Idel considera adecvata afirmat ia lui Schlomo Pines potrivit
careia Maimonide nu este un mistic. Sugestive n acest sens snt analizele lui Moshe Idel care pun n evidenta
cteva din elementele care disting abordarea lui Abulafia de cea a lui Maimonide: 1) accentul pus pe salvarea
iminenta; 2) conceptul unei filosofii unitive; 3) rolul limbajului si al problemelor lingvistice.40 n ciuda faptului
ca se considera cel mai maimonidian dintre maimonidieni, Abulafia se ndeparteaza de viziunea lui Maimonide
prin exacerbarea acestor elemente.
1) Idel trateaza opera celor doi gnditori n doua perspective diferite. Maimonide desfasoara o opera
arheologica; Abulafia propune o deschidere eshatologica. Moshe Idel priveste Ghidul ratacitilor ca pe o opera
orientata spre trecut, o opera arheologica ce aduce la suprafata secretele pierdute. n sustinerea interpretarilor
sale, Idel angajeaza afirmatiile lui Maimonide potrivit carora esoterismul, asa cum este el descris n opera sa,
este rezultat al propriei sale reconstructii; ca o astfel de restaurare era reclamata de faptul ca n conditiile
exilului secretele au fost pierdute. Idel constata ca filosoful medieval nu ne spune care este metoda
redescoperirii acestora, daca se bazeaza pe o lectura atenta a textelor biblice sau a fost desprinsa din textele
rabinice ce tratau si subiecte esoterice. Maimonide afirma pur si simplu ca doar el poate sa refaca linia pierduta
a transmiterii secretelor Torei. Demersul lui Maimonide "este unul exegetic, care are repercusiuni importante
pentru atitudinea contemporanilor sai fata de Iudaism, care pot gasi o perspectiva interesanta, n special pentru
intelighentia evreiasca ce a fost expusa la forme non-iudaice de teologie si filosofie."41
Spre deosebire de interpretarile date de filosof, pentru Moshe Idel interpretarile secretelor Torei propuse de
Abraham Abulafia au loc ntr-o stare speciala de constiinta, sub presiunea iminentei mntuiri. n procesul acestei
mntuiri, care este deopotriva personala si nationala, Abulafia nsusi pare ca propriul sau Mesia si ca Mesia
comunitatii. Descifrarea secretelor Torei ofera o experienta mntuitoare42.
2) O deosebire esentiala pe care Idel o descopera nu numai ntre Maimonide si Abulafia, ci si ntre gndirea
filosofica si gndirea mistica n general apare n ceea ce priveste modul de a percepe fenomenul unio mystica.
Moshe Idel observa ca n timp ce gndirea maimonidiana limita stiinta umana la domeniul mundan si prin
aceasta ajungea la concluzia ca fiinta umana nu poate cunoaste natura lui Dumnezeu, Abulafia vorbeste despre
posibilitatea transformarii intelectului uman n Intelect Agent n timpul experientei mistice43. Aceasta viziune
este formulata de Abulafia chiar n comentariile sale asupra Ghidului ratacitilor.
Exegetii lui Maimonide au atras atentia ca accentuarea teologiei negative trimite la un soi de mistica aflata
dincolo de rationalismul filosofic. Karen Armstrong a sesizat chiar faptul ca pentru Maimonide profetia este
superioara filosofiei deoarece profetul are o cunoastere n care conlucreaza perfect elementul rational si cel

imaginativ.44
Snt sugestive n acest sens analizele lui Dan Cohn-Sherbok care aduce n discutie o tipologie umana propusa de
Maimonide, care mparte oamenii n trei clase: 1) nteleptii si filosofii, care au foarte dezvoltate capacitatile
rationale, nsa au o imaginatie insuficient dezvoltata; 2) oamenii de stat, politicienii, care au o imaginatie foarte
dezvoltata dar au un intelect deficient; 3) profetii, al caror intelect este bine dezvoltat si care au o imaginatie
perfecta45.
Acest statut aparte al profetului si al profetiei a fost bine surprins de Alan F. Segal46 atunci cnd releva faptul ca
desi Tora a fost data ca un dar special poporului evreu, ca un dar special al profetiei perfecte, n perspectiva
maimonidiana toti cei care studiaza si practica prevederile legii se pregatesc sa devina profeti: participam la
profetie n masura n care ne perfectionam potentialitatile"47 . Acest lucru se are n vedere atunci cnd se afirma
ca profetia este o sinteza a facultatilor intelectuale si imaginative, iar ngerul profetiei este identificat cu
Intelectul agent. Astfel, Segal constata ca Maimonide ajunge la o regndire originala a iudaismului printr-o
ntelegere rationala (diferita de cea prezenta n islam sau n crestinism unde ratiunea si credinta snt ierarhizate
si trebuie sa cedeze, n formule diverse, una n fata celeilalte) n care ratiunea si revelatia snt procese identice
si ambele snt acelasi lucru cu puterea prin care Dumnezeu creeaza si mentine universul"48.
Moshe Idel arata termenii n care la Maimonide si la Abulafia apare psihologia profetiei: profetia presupune
coborrea unui influx, cert de natura intelectuala, nti asupra intelectului uman si apoi asupra capacitatilor
imaginative. .. Abulafia confera intelectului controlul activitatii imaginative."49
Lucrurile devin mai clare daca ne amintim analizele lui Maurice-Ruben Hayoun care arata ca pentru Maimonide
Dumnezeu este n acelasi timp intelect, inteligenta si inteligibil; este fiinta cu existenta necesara, cauza prima,
forma universului si intelectul prim50. Analiznd teoria maimonidiana a intelectului, Maurice-Ruben Hayoun
arata ca trebuie sa vorbim de 1) intelectul hylic, ce da omului masura sa de fiinta rationala capabila sa vegheze
la perfectiunea corpului datorita aspectului sau practic si la perfectiunea sufletului datorita aspectului sau
teoretic; 2) intelectul n act care aduce procesul tripartit al abstractiei, conceptualizarii si ntelegerii spre o
ntelegere unica prin care nsusi intelectul hylic este actualizat, 3) intelectul agent, conceput ca agent al lumii
sublunare, el face ca intelectul hylic sa treaca de la potenta la act; 4) intelectul dobndit cel la care omul ajunge
atunci cnd realizeaza deplina sa maturitate si se poate contempla pe sine. Acest intelect este privit ca fiind
legatura unica si autentica ntre om si Dumnezeu. Intelectul activ accentueaza elementul de universalitate, cel
dobndit aspectul individualitatii, ele se afla nsa ntr-o nazuinta comuna, modelata moral si conexata cu
mplinirea Legii. Astfel ar trebui sa ntelegem cu Maimonide ca legatura dintre om si Dumnezeu poate fi ntarita
doar printr-o constanta preocupare n vederea apropierii si a iubirii lui Dumnezeu51.
Idel arata ca terminologia aristotelica este extrem de importanta deoarece ea a furnizat conceptele pentru ceea ce
era numit "unire intelectuala" cu Dumnezeu. Din epistemologia aristotelica, potrivit careia intelectul si
inteligibilul formeaza o unitate n actul cognitiv, se dezvolta mai apoi concluzia logica ce presupune ca "actul
intelectiv n care Dumnezeu este obiectul intelectului uman corespunde cu ceea ce e cunoscut ca unire
mistica"52. Aceasta atragea dupa sine o asimilare a limbajului filosofic aristotelic n vederea constituirii
terminologiei mistice.
n ciuda limbajului aristotelic, comun cabalistilor si filosofilor, Moshe Idel arata ca Maimonide, desi accepta ca
imitatio dei poate fi obtinuta n viata terestra, n domeniul practicii umane, respinge posibilitatea de a se realiza
o unire a omului cu divinitatea att timp ct fiinta umana este nca n aceasta existenta53. O pozitie asemanatoare
este sustinuta si de Gershom Scholem atunci cnd demonstreaza ca n unirea cu Dumnezeu se pastreaza
diferenta ontologica. Spre deosebire de Scholem care considera ca n experienta mistica se pastreaza o
permanenta distanta ntre om si Dumnezeu, Moshe Idel aduce dovezi textuale ale cabalistilor care arata ca
pentru mistici exista o "unio mystica suprema" n care nu se mai poate face distinctie ntre cele doua entitati ce
se unesc54.
Astfel, autorul nostru constata ca n timp ce Maimonide subliniaza n mod accentuat distinctia dintre intelectia
umana si cea divina, conceptia abulafiana promoveaza un panteism intelectual. Moshe Idel explica situatia
paradoxala n care Abulafia afirma apropierea sa de gndirea lui Maimonide prin faptul ca acesta o interpreteaza
printr-o grila raportata la propriile sale experiente spirituale. Pe aceasta baza se consolideaza convingerea lui
Abulafia ca opera lui Maimonide nu este doar o etapa intermediara ntre spiritualitatea biblica si experientele
sale spirituale, ci, n acelasi timp, o opera ce recupereaza cele 36 secrete pierdute pe care misticul le poate
dezvalui prin interpretare.

Pentru a explica tipul de experienta pe care Abulafia o propune ca unire mistica, Moshe Idel apeleaza la
termenul devekut care n cabala extatica desemneaza unirea individualului cu divinul. Acest termen este folosit
pentru a arata ca exista experiente n care se sustine ca sufletul este unit cu sufletul universal; ca sufletul sufera
o transformare care e descrisa de mistici si de filosofi ca o conversie a individualului ntr-o entitate
universala55. Astfel, ni se relateaza ca unirea cu totalitatea este descrisa de Abulafia n termeni maimonidieni ca
o unire ntre o entitate individuala care este intelectul agent cu o entitate universala numita ntr-un limbaj
ambiguu tot intelectul agent. Aceasta ambiguitate este socotita de Idel ca fiind un rezultat al dublei naturi a
intelectului activ. Idel considera ca la Abulafia conceptul de universalizare este legat mai degraba de intelect
dect de suflet. n acest sens se constata n rndul realitatilor create trei tipuri de fiinte: 1) intelectul care este
fragmentar dar n acelasi timp si universal si indivizibil; 2) sufletul care desi este indivizibil, este totdeauna
partial si niciodata universal; 3) trupul care este si fragmentar si divizibil. Ceea ce ne apare aici ca deosebit de
important este faptul ca n acest raport de individualizare si universalizare, organul mistic fundamental este
intelectul.56
3) Idel constata ca supraevaluarea intelectului este nsotita si de o supraevaluare a limbajului. Limbajul si
intelectul se ntlnesc la Abulafia ntr-o tehnica mistica menita sa duca la o intensificare a vietii spirituale, la
experiente extatice care induc stari profetice. Asa cum am mai amintit, aceste stari profetice snt indicatori ai
unui status Mesianic57.
Dorind sa adnceasca distinctia dintre modul filosofic si cel mistic de abordare, Moshe Idel arata ca pentru
Maimonide limbajul joaca un rol important n comunicare, dar nu are nici un rol n domeniul contemplatiei sau
n cel al intelectului. La Abulafia, nsa, limbajul este parte a tehnicilor mistice, care vizeaza experienta si
interpretarea58.
De altfel, Moshe Idel arata ca uneori Abulafia ntrebuinteaza tehnicile nu pentru a atinge o stare de uniune
mistica cu divinul, ci pentru a primi revelatii care au fost descrise drept conversatii dintre puterile mistice si cele
angelice care reprezinta imagini metaforice pentru Intellectus Agens, un intelect de natura spirituala desprins de
materie si care joaca un rol important n gnoseologia filosofica iudaica precum si n anumite traditii mistice din
Evul Mediu"59.
Moshe Idel ne da imaginea radicala a utilizarii mistice a limbajului, aratndu-se ca Abulafia merge pna acolo
nct ajunge sa conceapa Ghidul ratacitilor ca pe o combinatie de litere din care prin tehnici hermeneutice, si cu
sprijinul traditiei care transmite cele 36 de titluri ascunse ale capitolelor Ghidului, se poate ajunge la dezvaluirea
tuturor secretelor Torei60.
ntregul efort depus de Abulafia trebuie privit ca o modalitate de resemnificare a traditiei prin arcanizarea unui
text filosofic, care la rndul sau era preocupat de secretizarea si n acelasi timp de demistificarea traditiei
iudaice. O maniera de a explica cum se dezvolta acest raport este data de Moshe Idel atunci cnd pune n
evidenta dezvoltarile n plan exegetic aduse de confruntarile dintre codul alegoric adoptat de filosofi si codul
simbolic impus de catre cabalisti61.
O alta maniera explicativa presupune parasirea alegoriei filosofice obisnuite si instrumentarea unei conceptii n
care numai nlauntrul limbajului este posibil sa se gaseasca solutii ale sensului"62. Totodata, cabalistii par sa fi
gasit solutia pentru trecerea la eliminarea tuturor confruntarilor n planul exegetic afirmnd ca trebuie sa se
priceapa ca toate interpretarile duc spre acelasi principiu esential: dobndirea unei experiente mistice"63.
n acelasi timp, nu trebuie sa scapam din vedere importanta pe care o acorda Moshe Idel confruntarii dintre
filosofie si scripturi n cultura europeana, fapt ce poate fi regasit sub forma unei constiinte a unei tensiuni
creatoare64 si n gndirea iudaica. Filosofia evreiasca se naste tocmai la punctul de convergenta, confruntare si
interpelare reciproca a traditiei religioase si a creatiei filosofice.
Note:
1 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, n Revue de Metaphysique et de Morale, No
4/1998, p. 498.
2 Moshe Idel, Radical Hermeneutics: From Ancient to Medieval, and Modern Hermeneutics, n Atti dei
convegni lincei, Convegno Internazionale sul tema: Ermeneutica e critica, Academia Nationale dei Lincei,
Roma, 1998, pp. 165 si urm.
3 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, traducere de Mihaela Frunza, Ed. Dacia, Cluj-Napoca, 2001, p.
8.
4 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, loc. cit., p. 495.

5 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., pp. 8-9.

6 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, loc. cit., p. 496.
7 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., p. 10.
8 Moshe Halbertal, Ezoterism si exoterism. Restrictiile misterului n traditia iudaica, traducere de Roxana
Havrici, Ed. Limes, Cluj-Napoca, 2004, p. 85.
9 Moshe Halbertal, Ezoterism si exoterism. Restrictiile misterului n traditia iudaica, ed. cit., p. 85-86.
"Maimonide introduce conceptia conform careia ezoterismul e un mijloc de a integra filosofia n traditie" (p.
87).
10 Moshe Idel, Cabala. Noi perspective, Ed. Nemira, Bucuresti, 2000, p. 336.
11 Moshe Idel, Cabala. Noi perspective, ed. cit., p. 338.
12 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., p. 13.
13 Ibidem. 14 Ibidem.
15 Moshe Idel, Cabala. Noi perspective, ed. cit., p. 339.
16 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, loc. cit., p. 497.
17 Moshe Halbertal, Ezoterism si exoterism. Restrictiile misterului n traditia iudaica, ed. cit., p. 69.
18 Karen Armstrong, A History of God. From Abraham to Present: the 4000-year Quest for God, Mandarin,
London, 1996, p. 198.
19 Idem, p. 226.
20 Maurice-Ruben Hayoun, O istorie intelectuala a iudaismului, Ed. Hasefer, Bucuresti, 1998, pp.7-8.
21 Idem, p. 108.
22 Idem, p. 118.
23 Julius Guttmann, Philosophies of Judaism. The History of jewish Philosophy from Biblical Times to Franz
Rosensweig, The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia, 1964 (5724), pp. 178-179.
24 Warren Zev Harvey, Maimonide (Moise), n Enciclopedia Universalis, tome 11, pp. 525-526.
25 Maurice-Ruben Hayoun, Maimonide, PUF, Paris, 1987, p. 35.
26 Moshe Halbertal, Ezoterism si exoterism. Restrictiile misterului n traditia iudaica, ed. cit., p. 72:
"Ezoterismul faciliteaza diviziunea muncii, conditie esentiala a activitatii filosofului. Democratizarea cunoasteri
sau universalizarea spiritului filosofic ar conduce la distrugerea lumii; astfel, pentru a asigura continuitatea
existentei filosofului si a filosofiei, acest spirit trebuie sa fie accesibil doar ezotericilor".
27 Moshe Halbertal, Ezoterism si exoterism. Restrictiile misterului n traditia iudaica, ed. cit., pp. 69-70.
28 Idem, p. 77.
29 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., p. 112.
30 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, loc. cit., p. 501.
31 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., p. 16.
32 Idem, p. 21.
33 Idem, p. 31.
34 Idem, p. 50.
35 Idem, p. 51.
36 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., p. 54. Asupra influentei lui Maimonide asupra lui
Abulafia vezi si Moshe Idel, Mesianism si mistica, Ed. Hasefer, Bucuresti, 1996, pp. 20 si urm.
37 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., p. 64.
38 Idem, p. 70.
39 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., p. 70.
40 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, loc. cit., p. 499.
41 Idem, p. 499.
42 Idem, p. 500.
43 Idem, p. 518.
44 Karen Armstrong, A History of God. From Abraham to Present: the 4000-year Quest for God, Mandarin,
London, 1996.
45 Dan Cohn-Sherbok, Jewish Philosophy, p. 88.
46 Alan F. Segal, The Jewish Tradition in Willard G. Oxtoby, World Religions. Western Traditions, Oxford
University Press, Toronto, Oxford, 1996.

47 Alan F. Segal, The Jewish Tradition in Willard G. Oxtoby (ed.), World Religions. Western Traditions, Oxford
University Press, Toronto, Oxford, 1996, p. 92. "O data cu capacitatea umana de a gndi, oamenii beneficiaza de
providenta lui Dumnezeu. n masura n care oamenii si folosesc capacitatile lor rationale, Dumnezeu este
capabil sa i perceapa ca individualitati si sa le conduca actiunile." (p. 91).
JSRI No.10 /Spring 2005 p. 114
48 Alan F. Segal, The Jewish Tradition, op. cit., p. 93.
49 Moshe Idel, Golem, Editura Hasefer, Bucuresti, 2003, p. 180.
50 Maurice-Ruben Hayoun, Maimonide, ed. cit., p. 42.
51 Maurice-Ruben Hayoun, Maimonide, ed. cit., pp. 83-88. Astfel, despre intelectul dobndit putem citi n
Ghidul ratacitilor, I, 31: "ti-am aratat deja ca acest intellect care se raspndeste asupra noastra din partea lui
Dumnezeu este legatura care se raspndeste ntre noi si el. Depinde de tine fie sa ntaresti si sa controlezi aceasta
legatura, fie sa o slabesti si sa o diminuezi putin cite putin, pna la a o desface. Aceasta legatura nu poate fi
ntarita dect daca o folosim pentru a-l iubi pe Dumnezeu si pentru a ne apropia de el, asa cum am aratat; ea se
slabeste si se diminueaza cnd ti ocupi gndirea cu ceea ce este nafara lui. Trebuie sa sti ca, chiar daca ai fi
omul cel mai nvatat n metafizica adevarata, daca ti ntorci gndul de la Dumnezeu si te ocupi cu totul de
mncarea ta sau de alte afaceri necesare, ai rupt aceasta legatura ce exista ntre tine si Dumnezeu si tu nu mai
esti el, dupa cum nici el nu mai este cu tine Iata de ce oamenii superiori nu folosesc dect foarte putine
momente pentru a se ocupa de alte lucruri dect de el"
52 Moshe Idel, Cabala. Noi perspective, ed. cit., p. 70.
53 Moshe Idel, Studies in Ecstatic Kabbalah, State University of New York Press, Abany, 1988, pp. 1-31.
54 Moshe Idel, Maimonide si mistica evreiasca, ed. cit., p. 84.
55 Moshe Idel, Studies in Ecstatic Kabbalah, ed. cit., p. 28.
56 Moshe Idel, Universalization and Integration: Two Conceptions of Mystical Union in Jewish Mysticism, n
Moshe Idel and Bernard McGinn (eds.), Mystical Union in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. An Ecumenical
Dialogue, The Continuum Publishing Compahy, New York, 1996, pp. 31-32.
57 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, loc. cit., p. 503.
58 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, loc. cit., p. 508.
59 Moshe Idel, Cabalistii nocturni, traducere de Ana-Elena Ilinca, Ed. Provopress, Cluj-Napoca, 2005, p. 10.
60 Moshe Idel, Abulafia's Secrets of the Guide: A Linguistic Turn, loc. cit., p. 518.
61 Moshe Idel, Perfectiuni care absorb. Cabala si interpretare, Ed. Polirom, Iasi, 2004, p. 303.
62 Idem, p. 362.
63 Idem, p. 369.
64 Idem, p. 438.
johnadriancostache@yahoo.co.uk
Jacques Derrida, Credinta si cunoastere. Veacul si iertarea
Faith and Knowledge. Century and Forgiveness
Ed. Paralela 45, Pitesti-Bucuresti, 2004
Undeva pe la sfarsitul anului 2003, nceputul anului 2004 celor cateva traduceri din opera lui Derrida li s-a mai
adaugat una Credinta si cunoastere. Lucrarea, aparuta initial n 1995 la editorul italian Laterza si la Seuil n
Franta, cuprinde doua texte - unul, care si da titlul volumului, subintitulat Cele doua surse ale "religiei" n
limitele simplei ratiuni si Veacul si iertarea, un interviu cu Michel Wieviorka. Desi, dupa cum se vede, e mai
bine de un an de la aparitia ei, din pacate, aceasta carte a trecut aproape neobservata n cultura romana. Spunem
"din pacate" caci acest volum are o dubla importanta pentru gandirea filosofica contemporana.
n primul rand e vorba de faptul ca, prin problematica pe care o abordeaza aceea a religiei, a religiei astazi ca si
problematica a "rentoarcerii elementului religios" Derrida se angajeaza poate pentru prima oara n dialog cu
directia hermeneutica a filosofiei contemporane. Dupa cum se stie, aceasta problematica este una favorita ntre
temele gandirii lui Vattimo n anii '90, filosoful italian abordand-o explicit cu un an naintea lui Derrida n
Dincolo de interpretare. Semnificatia hermeneuticii pentru filosofie.
n al doilea rand nsa, importanta acestei carti rezida n faptul ca, punand problema ntr-o maniera kantiana, n

"limitele simplei ratiuni", filosoful francez ncearca mai presus de toate o explicitare a semnificatiei acestei
"rentoarceri a religiei" n timpurile noastre, si o punere a ei n legatura cu abstractiunea, cu ceea ce s-ar putea
numi tele-tehno-stiinta actuala. Ipoteza centrala a lui Derrida n aceasta privinta este ca fata de aceasta teletehno-stiinta care este prin ea nsasi o forta de dezradacinare si delocalizare, religia se afla n acelasi timp "n
antagonism reactiv si supralicitare reafirmativa" (p. 8).
Cum se poate explica aceasta "rentoarcere a religiei"? Asa cum arata filosoful francez, aceasta este una dintre
cele mai dificile ntrebari n fata carora suntem pusi n timpurile noastre. Caci, ce vrea aceasta sa nsemne n
fapt? Cu siguranta nu e vorba aici de nasterea fundamentalismelor si integrismelor n sanul diferitelor religii.
Islamismul nu trebuie n nici un fel confundat cu islamul, chiar daca primul se exercita n numele celui din urma
acesta este un principiu de la care trebuie pornit. De aceea, ntelegem ca ceea ce se re-ntoarce n timpurile
noastre este religiosul ca atare.
Pe de alta parte, ne arata filosoful francez, aceasta re-ntoarcere a religiosului nu este sub nici o forma o rentoarcere simpla. Nu poate fi vorba de o ntoarcere a aceluiasi n istorie, caci ceea ce se petrece acum, nu s-a
mai petrecut niciodata. Conditiile n care aceasta revenire are loc sunt total schimbate si aceasta deoarece
figurile ei - "tele-tehno-media-stiintifice", capitaliste si politico-economice sunt fara precedent.
Indiferent ca dam crezare etimologiei ciceroniene a religie (religie < lat. relegare) sau celei a lui Lactantiu si
Tertulian (religie < lat. religare), nu poate fi contestat faptul ca termenul este unul latin, iar conceptul de religie
este prin excelenta unul crestin si occidental. Asa cum arata Derrida, daca noua astazi ne este greu sa gandim
aceasta rentoarcere a religiei, faptul se datoreaza explicit tocmai acestei occidentalitati a religiei si a opozitiei
cu ratiunea si stiinta n care am fost nvatati sa o gandim odata cu iluminismul. Adevarul este nsa ca o atare
opozitie nu exista.
Desi pentru noi astazi "problema religiei este mai ntai ntrebarea asupra ntrebarii", asa cum arata Derrida,
religia n ea nsasi este un raspuns, poate chiar RSPUNSUL. Nu exista nsa, niciodata raspuns fara principiu
de responsabilitate, ne spune filosoful francez. Orice adresare catre celalalt, ntoarcerea fetei spre altul pentru a-i
raspunde (mai ales atunci cand posibilitatea de a vedea cu ochii sai cum stau lucrurile este suspendata)
subntinde fagaduinta ca ceea ce este spus este adevarul si numai adevarul. Adresarea catre celalalt presupune
juramantul asupra adevarului a ceea ce se spune, dupa cum si ascultarea unui altul, o fiduciaritate ireductibila.
De aceea se poate spune ca, raportarea la altul care precede orice legatura sociala se bazeaza pe un act de
credinta, fiind prin excelenta un act de marturie n absolut. nsa, n masura n care orice adresare catre celalalt
este o marturie n absolut, chiar n momentul performarii sale, performativitatea sa prin ea nsasi, nu poate decat
sa instituie absolutul. Pentru Derrida, fagaduinta facuta sub juramant, luandu-l pe Dumnezeu de martor nu poate
sa nu genereze pe Dumnezeu, aproape ntr-un mod masinal.
Dar acest act de credinta, fiduciaritatea care sta la baza oricarei religii ca si o sursa ai ei sta si la baza
performativitatii tehnico-stiintifice. Am nvatat astazi n sfarsit ca actul stiintific nu este niciodata separat de
practica. Legatura dintre cunoasterea comunitatii stiintifice si orizontul interventiei efective n sfera realului
nsa, este dat tocmai de aceasta fiduciaritate elementara. Exact din aceasta cauza pretinsa opozitie dintre religie
si stiinta sau ratiune nu poate exista.
Pe langa aceasta experienta fundamentala a credintei, religia se origineaza si ntr-o alta experienta cea a
sacrului, nteles ca sfant, neatins, teafar si nevatamat. Religia presupune ntotdeauna ambele experiente, nefiind
altceva decat elipsa lor, adica tensiunea dintre ele care duce cand la mascarea uneia cand a alteia. Pentru Derrida
nsa, si aici sta toata noutatea viziunii pe care filosoful ne-o propune n aceasta chestiune, tocmai prin atitudinea
disimulata a religiei fata de propriile sale surse se poate explica atat "rentoarcerea elementului religios" n
timpurile noastre, cat si razboaiele religioase care ne traverseaza secolul.
Alianta dintre tele-tehno-media-stiinta si religie o delocalizeaza si, n termenii lui Vattimo, o slabeste pe aceasta
din urma. n cazul particular al crestinismului sau iudeo-crestinismului, aceasta delocalizare ia cu siguranta
forma universalizarii sale. De pilda, conceptele centrale ale dreptului international ca si retorica politica
mondiala sunt fundate pe un discurs eminamente crestin. Sa ne gandim numai la omniprezentele apeluri la pace,
la ntelegere si la toleranta pe care le-am auzit n ultimul timp si vom fi pe deplin edificati, caci, dupa cum se
stie, spiritul tolerantei este unul profund crestin. (De aceea, Derrida prefera sa desemneze era pe care o traim nu
atat prin englezescul mondializare, ci prin mondialatinizare.) nsa, ceea ce aduce cu sine aceasta universalizare a
crestinismului, aceasta proliferare a discursurilor pacifiste - tinute n primul rand de Papa, cel mai spectacular si
mai cederomizat om al planetei, n cuvintele lui Derrida este pentru filosoful francez tocmai re-afirmarea

nietzscheana a mortii lui Dumnezeu si reimanentizarea antropologica. Totul se petrece ca si cum ar trebui sa ne
iubim unii pe altii tocmai pentru ca nu mai exista un Dumnezeu care sa ne iubeasca; totul se petrece ca si cum
drepturile omului ar fi mai importante decat orice altceva n timpurile noastre tocmai pentru ca nu avem nici o
datorie fata de adevarul absolut si transcendent al ordinii divine tocmai pentru ca asa ceva nu exista.
n cazul celorlalte religii, pe de alta parte, aceasta delocalizare pe care o aduce alianta dintre tele-tehno-stiinta si
religie ia forma unei dezradacinari radicale. Tocmai din aceasta cauza n sanul islamului se naste islamismul si,
n genere se nasc toate fundamentalismele. Asa cum arata Derrida, ntre diferitele fundamentalisme sau
integrisme, ntre ideologia care le anima si tipul de rationalitate pe care l aduce cu sine modernizarea teletehnologica, nu trebuie sa vedem nici o contradictie pentru ca nu exista nici una. Altfel spus, pentru un
fundamentalist musulman nu exista nici o tensiune si nici o opozitie ntre ideea pastrarii intacte a unei traditii si
faptul de a investi n tehnologie militara americana de ultima generatie.
Pe de alta parte nsa, datorita sursei sale sacrale, religia ia o atitudine de reactivitate fata de masina, tehnica si
tot ce implica acestea, constituindu-si o anumita auto-imunitate la ele. n timpurile noastre exigenta neatinsului,
a teafarului si nevatamatului este, de asemeni, cat se poate de evidenta. n sanul crestinismului si pe batranul
continent suntem astazi martorii unui respect absolut fata de viata, porunca: "Sa nu ucizi!" fiind parca singura
pe care ne-o mai amintim dintre cele zece. Totodata nsa, tot aici se da curs cu precadere si vocatiei sacrificiale
imanente oricarei religii - abatajul de masa, pescuitul si vanatoarea la scara industriala, experimentele pe
animale sunt doar cateva exemple. Asa cum arata Derrida, ideea ce sta n spatele acestei atitudini duale este ca
"viata nu are absolut nici o valoare decat cu conditia de a valora mai mult decat viata" (p. 66). Viata este sacra
sau sfanta doar n masura n care ea se sustrage sferei biologicului si poate depune marturie de ordinea
transcendentei si a divinitatii, a sacralitatii si nevatamarii sale.
n cazul diferitelor fundamentalisme, arata filosoful francez, aceasta miscare de auto-imunizare fata de masina
si tehnica poate fi vazuta n faptul ca violenta pe care o aduc cu sine razboaiele religioase pe care acestea le
pornesc este ntotdeauna de doua feluri, sau, dupa cum spune Derrida, "are doua varste". Prima este una
contemporana, bazandu-se pe mijloacele cele mai sofisticate din punctul de vedere al tele-tehnologiei militare.
Cea de-a doua nsa, este o noua violenta arhaica ce, ntorcandu-se mpotriva masinii, se situeaza n proximitatea
corpului si se bazeaza mai degraba pe sex sau pe mainile goale. Sa ne gandim numai la zecile de violuri din
timpul razboiului bosniac si vom fi profund edificati n acest sens.
Dupa cum se vede, exista o diferenta radicala ntre raspunsul pe care l ofera Derrida problemei "rentoarcerii
elementului religios" si raspunsul pe care l ofera Vattimo n lucrarea deja amintita. Pentru filosoful italian
aceasta rentoarcere (pe care o ntelege simplu prin identificarea ei cu proliferarea n discursurile etice a
principiului crestin al caritatii sau prin reafirmarea politeismului, chiar si ca politeism al valorilor) poate fi
nteleasa doar prin asumarea ca act fondator al culturii occidentale a kenozei care trebuie nteleasa mai presus
de toate ca si slabire si prin identificarea istoriei fiintei de care ne vorbeste Heidegger cu istoria mplinirii
nihilismului n Occident. n raport cu aceasta interpretare ce tine ntr-o anumita masura de o mistica filosofica,
raspunsul lui Derrida este cat se poate de clar unul mai persuasiv si mai complet.
Al doilea text care constituie volumul derridian n discutie Veacul si iertarea poate fi de o deosebita importanta
pentru cercetatorii romani n sfera religiilor si ideologiilor, caci mai deunazi se pusese problema uitarii si a
iertarii pe unele grupuri de discutii. Definitia oferita celui din urma concept, dupa cum era de asteptat din partea
filosofului francez, iese din nou din tiparele obisnuite. Exista un paradox al iertarii, ne spune Derrida, si tocmai
prin aceasta iertarea poate fi ceea ce trebuie sa fie "iertarea nu iarta decat ceea ce este de neiertat". Ea nu este si
nu poate fi n nici un fel conditionata de un act de cainta din partea vinovatului sau de o schimbare a atitudinii
sale. Caci, n cazul acesta, ce am ierta si pe cine? Putem oare ierta ceva, o fapta care nu implica fiinta ntreaga a
cuiva? Putem ierta oare pe cineva care prin cainta a devenit altul si care nu mai este acelasi cu cel care a savarsit
fapta? n aceste temeiuri, dupa Derrida, se ntelege ca iertarea nu poate fi identificata cu vreun concept juridic,
ca nu este apanajul unei persoane n nume moral (chiar daca pe scena politica internationala se face din ce n ce
mai mult recurs la iertare) si ca poate fi acordata doar de victima sau de Dumnezeu.
n ncheiere am vrea sa adaugam cateva cuvinte despre traducere. Dificultatile pe care le ridica de obicei
scriitura lui Derrida, plina de structuri sintactice greoaie, de cuvinte compuse greu asimilabile si n franceza si
de jocuri de cuvinte, sunt binecunoscute. De aceea, n cazul operei ganditorului francez, acel principiu
cantitativ-calitativ al traducerii perfecte pe care el nsusi l formuleaza n What Is a Relevant Translation? este
cu atat mai himeric, o transpunere a sensului cuvant la cuvant fiind imposibila. Si totusi, traducatorul roman al

lui Credinta si cunoastere, Emilian Cioc (cel caruia i datoram si traducerea din Positions din opera derridiana)
reuseste sa se apropie asimptotic de acest principiu caci, pe parcursul lecturii, nu de putine ori avem impresia ca
opera ar fi fost scrisa ca atare n romana. Aceasta l recomanda pe Emilian Cioc ca pe unul dintre cei mai buni
traducatori ai lui Derrida n limba romana si, totodata, recomanda Credinta si cunoastere ca pe una dintre cele
mai reusite transpuneri a unui text filosofic din ultimii ani.

Umberto Eco - Cinci scrieri morale: Five Moral Writings,Humanitas, Bucuresti, 2005
Reflexia etica a dobndit n ultima perioada o stringenta aparte, reusind sa atraga si autori care si-au aflat
consacrarea n alte domenii ale filosofiei. Este si cazul lui Umberto Eco, cunoscut publicului mai cu seama prin
tratatele sale de semiotica si prin romanele sale, mai nou autor al unei cartulii traduse la Humanitas sub titlul de
Cinci scrieri morale. Prin aceasta lucrare, autorul si confirma nca o data racordajul la contemporaneitate: mai
mult dect o simpla lucrare de etica, volumul lui Eco este o carte de etica aplicata, abordnd astfel segmentul cel
mai recent si mai dinamic al acestei discipline filosofice.
Cele cinci piese ale ansamblului abordeaza fiecare o tema diferita din cadrul eticii aplicate: problema razboiului,
tema fascismului, etica jurnalistica, tema alteritatii si, n fine, problema, extrem de actuala n contextul sociopolitic european, a migratiei si a intolerantei. Fiecare dintre acestea este prezentata n stilul caracteristic al lui
Eco: fara a ignora tematizarile curente, respectiv bibliografia obligatorie a temei, nsa pastrnd o prospetime si o
nota personala extrem de marcata.
Publicata n perioada Razboiului din Golf, n zilele n care trupele aliate au intrat n Kuwait City", cum
precizeaza autorul, primul text si propune sa fundamenteze, n cinci puncte teoretice, teza aparent paradoxala a
imposibilitatii razboiului. Rnd pe rnd snt avansate argumentele referitoare la potentialul nimicitor al armelor
nucleare, care elimina existenta nvingatorilor dintr-un conflict; indistinctia taberelor inamice; prezenta massmediei, care neutralizeaza actiunile neasteptate; teza foucauldiana a disiparii puterii, care duce la supraevaluarea
elementului economic; n fine, pulverizarea regulilor strategiei de razboi, n conditiile n care, astazi, sustine
autorul, razboiul nu mai seamana cu un sistem n serie" ci cu unul n paralel". Toate acestea fac ca razboiul sa
nu mai semene cu cel din manualele de strategie militara, ci cu un eveniment cu consecinte imprevizibile pentru
toata lumea: Sfrsitul probabil al unui razboi este o confuzie generala". Pornind de la aceste observatii extrem
de lucide si de realiste, Eco desprinde concluzia logica din punct de vedere etic: Este o ndatorire intelectuala
sa proclamam absurditatea razboiului". ndatorire pe care, cu consecventa autorul o respecta pna la capat.
Textul despre fascism a fost destinat initial unui public american si a fost rostit n perioada n care SUA erau
bulversate de atentatul de la Oklahoma si de descoperirea unor grupari de extrema dreapta n America. Prin
intermediul sau, Eco ncearca sa explice nrudirile de familie" dintre diversele variante de ideologii extremiste
nazism, falangism, stalinism, si n acelasi timp, fascinatia pe care o produce termenul de fascism" singurul
care, desi nu reprezinta o ideologie monolitica (sau poate tocmai de aceea), a reusit sa supravietuiasca n
contexte diferite si sa denumeasca lucruri diferite.
De altfel, ca orice ideologie, fascismul ntretine o relatie speciala cu limbajul, anumite notiuni devenind
purtatoarele unor semnificatii aparte n cazul n care snt asociate acestei ideologii. nsa fascismul mai are o
proprietate lingvistica remarcabila: el paraseste contextul originar unde a fost creat (fascismul italian), migrnd
pe continente diferite, unde si gaseste corespondente ideologice dintre cele mai diverse. Explicatia pentru
aceasta performanta" o constituie flexibilitatea remarcabila a notiunii: Termenul de fascism" se adapteaza la
tot, fiindca pot sa fie eliminate dintr-un regim fascist unul sau mai multe elemente, fara sa-i fie stirbita vreun
moment marca fascista". n acelasi timp, la fel cum Martin Marty si Scott Appleby identifica o serie de trasaturi
cheie ale fundamentalismului (comparatia nu este ntmplatoare; asa cum se poate lesne sesiza, o parte din
trasaturile cheie ale fundamentalismului se regasesc si n schema autorului italian), Eco crede ca exista un
nucleu de caracteristici a ceea ce el numeste Ur-Fascism", sau fascism etern". Si n acest caz, nu este
obligatoriu ca un regim sa posede toate caracteristicile pentru a fi denumit fascist. Aceste trasaturi snt:
traditionalismul, refuzul modernismului, cultul actiunii pentru actiune, refuzul criticii, teama de diferenta, apelul
catre clasele de mijloc frustrate, nationalismul, stigmatizarea dusmanului, glorificarea luptei (nu lupta pentru
viata" ci viata pentru lupta", cum spune Eco), elitismul si eroismul, machismul, populismul calitativ si cultul

unui limbaj specific. Din nou, la sfrsitul acestui text, Eco avertizeaza asupra consecintelor etice: pentru ca UrFascismul poate nca sa se ntoarca sub cele mai nevinovate nfatisari", datoria tuturor este de a-l demasca si de
a avertiza asupra urmarilor sale.
Textul despre presa, adresat direct ziaristilor italieni la o ntlnire cu acestia n cadrul unor seminarii, se doreste
o critica constructiva a rolului pe care mass-media (n special cea scrisa) este chemata sa-l joace ntr-o
democratie. Desi referintele lui Eco provin aproape n exclusivitate din mass-media italiana, cititorul roman va
observa, cu siguranta, aplicabilitatea lor si n cazul presei autohtone. Observatia centrala a lui Eco este aceea ca,
n lupta cu concurenta directa si mai lesne difuzata am numit aici televiziunea cotidienele italiene si pierd
functia de informare si pe cea de comentare a stirilor, intrnd n ceea ce autorul numeste ideologia
spectacolului". Cu alte cuvinte, singurul mod n care presa scrisa crede ca reuseste sa contracareze televizorul
este copierea mijloacelor acestuia: saptamnalizarea" cotidienelor (publicarea pe spatii largi a unor informatii
mondene), declansarea unor scandaluri cu orice pret, folosirea pe scara extinsa a interviurilor, fixarea obsesiva
asupra celorlalte mijloace media (presa despre presa, presa despre televiziune). Eco constata ca cel care are de
pierdut din acest joc este chiar cititorul, de aceea cere presei sa se rentoarca la rolul sau fundamental din cadrul
oricarei democratii, si anume de a furniza cetatenilor informatii solide si corecte, si nu de a cauta senzationalul
si scandalul cu orice pret.
Tema alteritatii este introdusa de autor n contextul ncercarii de fundamentare a unei etici laice" care sa nu se
mai sprijine pe un fundament transcendent. ncercarea sa se ncruciseaza cu preocuparea (de sorginte
lingvistico-filosofica) de a descoperi universalii semantice" (expresii comune care sa se ntlneasca la toate
popoarele si n toate timpurile). Eco crede ca a gasit aceste universalii n legatura cu expresiile corpului (cu totii
avem ideea de sus, jos, a merge, a sta, etc.), prilej cu care, transfernd problema n registrul etic, are ocazia sa
vorbeasca de asa-numitele drepturi ale corpurilor". Ct despre fundamentul oricarei etici, chiar lipsita fiind de
un temei religios, transcendent, Eco l descopera, n descendenta levinasiana, n fata si privirea celuilalt: nu
reusim sa ntelegem cine suntem fara privirea si raspunsul celuilalt".
n fine, ultima parte a cartii este constituita dintr-un text compus din trei bucati independente, unite nsa prin
tematica: migratie, intoleranta si intolerabil. Problema migratiei este formulata de Eco n actualitatea anului
2000, n context european: cum va arata continentul european n conditiile unei migratii tot mai extinse a
populatiilor de pe celelalte continente (african si asiatic n principal)? Raspunsul este simplu: din ce n ce mai
colorat.
Corolarul acestei constatari l constituie sesizarea cresterii amplorii fenomenului rasist, care duce la tema a
doua: intoleranta. Eco analizeaza acest termen n corelatie cu alti doi la moda, propusi adesea ca substitute:
fundamentalismul si integrismul. Totusi, Eco considera ca intoleranta nu se reduce la cei doi: intoleranta
preexista oricarei doctrine". Ceea ce i se pare cu adevarat periculos este intoleranta salbatica", ce presupune
exploatarea, printr-o doctrina de tip fundamentalist sau integrist, a unui fond popular de intoleranta profunda.
Exemplele propuse snt cele clasice: vnatoarea de vrajitoare sau persecutiile evreilor, ambele posibile datorita
preexistentei unor forme de intoleranta difuza, dar constanta, la nivelul maselor.
n acest caz, care este totusi solutia? Practicarea necritica a tolerantei binevoitoare? Nu, si aici intervine cea de-a
treia bucata, despre intolerabil. Toleranta ilimitata nu este posibila deoarece exista cu adevarat lucruri de
netolerat. Exemplul este din nou unul tipic, cazul Holocaustului originala este perspectiva (din nou, etica), din
care este formulata problema: Cnd se produce un fapt iesit din comun, pragul tolerabilitatii nu
mai este cel fixat de vechile legi". Ceea ce se cere n acest caz este o solidaritate colectiva si o responsabilitate
comun mpartasita n aplicarea consecventa a legilor noi.
Dincolo de precizarile suplimentare care pot fi oricnd facute pe marginea unei astfel de lucrari, cartea lui Eco
ramne o lectura agreabila, scrisa cu talentul si umorul binecunoscut al autorului lui Baudolino sau al Numelui
trandafirului. Ea arata ca meditatia pe teme de etica aplicata este una din modalitatile n care reflectia filosofica
poate supravietui n secolul XXI, ba poate chiar deveni best-seller. Snt cunoscute de altfel, volumele unor
autori de talia lui Fukuyama sau Sloterdijk, tot pe teme etice, aparute tot la Humanitas. Nu ne ndoim ca acesta
va fi si destinul celor Cinci scrieri morale.

Moshe Idel - Cabalistii nocturni Nocturnal Kabbalists Traducere de Ana-Elena Ilinca,

Ed. Provopress, Cluj-Napoca, 2005
Moshe Idel este recunoscut n lumea academica drept cel mai important hermeneut al cabalei. Este profesor la
Universitatea Ebraica din Ierusalim, preda cursuri si sustine prelegeri si conferinte la toate marile universitati
din lume. A predat si n Romania ntr-o foarte frumoasa limba romana, ce aminteste de zona Neamtului pe care
o considera pamntul unei energii privilegiate care a dat nastere unor gnditori precum Mihail Sadoveanu, Ion
Creanga sau Paisie, creatorul isihasmului romanesc.
Este autorul unei opere impresionante, accesibila n mai multe limbi, fiind situat azi n cmpul studiilor
religioase alaturi de Ioan Petru Culianu sau Mircea Eliade, ca sa mai amintim doar alti doi romani. Dintre
volumele publicate amintim: Abraham Abulafia's Works and Doctrines (Jerusalem, 1976), The Mystical
Experience in Abraham Abulafia (New York, 1988), Cabala: Noi Perspective (Bucuresti, 2000), Studies in
Ecstatic Kabbalah (New York, 1988), Language, Torah and Hermeneutics in Abraham Abulafia (New York,
1989), Golem (Bucuresti, 2003), Maimonide si mistica evreiasca (Cluj, 2001), Hasidism - ntre extaz si magie
(Bucuresti, 2001), Mesianism si mistica (Bucuresti, 1997), Messianic Mystics (New Haven, 1998), Perfectiuni
careabsorb: Cabala si interpretare (Iasi, 2004), Cabala si Eros (Bucuresti, 2005).
Editura Porovopress ne propune Cabalistii nocturni, cea mai recenta traducere din opera lui Moshe Idel,
realizata de o traducatoare de exceptie din generatia tnara, Ana Elena Ilinca. Volumul se concentreaza asupra
modului n care visul ne pune n contact cu o realitate ascunsa. Importanta visului este evaluata n legatura cu
curentul principal al misticii iudaice, Cabala. n acest cadru este important nu visul ca atare, ci tehnicile onirice
pe care visele le induc.
Importanta viselor si a tehnicilor esoterice onirice este un lucru cunoscut n spatii culturale diverse, dintre care
pot fi amintite templele si sanctuarele antice, n special cele grecesti. Moshe Idel considera ca ceea ce se
constituie ca element original n domeniul oniricului n cazul Cabalei este faptul ca tehnicile onirice iudaice nu
depind de nici un loc sacru, ca presupun o putere divina dinamica, a carei mobilitate este legata de prezenta
mesagerilor angelici care mediaza prezenta divinului n lume.
Moshe Idel ncearca sa i convinga pe specialisti ca trebuie sa acorde o mai mare importanta literaturii care
trateaza tematizarea viselor, deoarece aceasta duce la o mai buna ntelegere a magiei iudaice si a fenomenelor
conexe ale misticismului iudaic.
Importanta experientelor onirice este relevata de Moshe Idel cu referinta la doua corpusuri definitorii ale
literaturii cabalistice. Este vorba de analiza viselor interogatie n Cabala extatica (unde exista o preocupare
speciala pentru aceasta tehnica n rndul ucenicilor lui Abraham Abulafia) si n corpusul cabalistic care se mai
gaseste azi doar n manuscrise si care este desemnat de literatura ce poarta numele de Cartea entitatii receptive.
Tehnicile onirice si dovedesc importanta prin faptul ca o menire esentiala a acestora este aceea de a induce
vise si de a convinge pe Dumnezeu si pe ngeri de a se revela n aceste vise. Moshe Idel subliniaza faptul ca
misticismul presupune o mentalitate n care ntre Dumnezeu si om exista un canal mereu deschis. n momentul
n care profetismul a ncetat, acest canal parea sa se fi nchis. nsa, n chiar cele mai conservatoare cercuri ale
literaturii rabinice se accepta faptul ca acest canal a ramas deschis iar modul privilegiat de acces la aceasta
deschidere este descris de literatura cabalei ca fiind cel oferit de vise si de tehnicile onirice legate de numele
divin.
Cartea lui Moshe Idel ofera ntlnirea cu manuscrise uitate si cu o traditie mistica pe care cel mai adesea o
percepem inadecvat. Lectura cartii Cabalistii nocturni este un bun prilej de intrare n una dintre cele mai
fascinante lumi. Este totodata o carte deschizatoare de ntrebari n legatura cu ceea ce este ascuns n viata
nocturna a lumii noastre care se cere mereu revrajita.

PSIHOLOGIE
Termenul psihologie provine din grecescul psyche [soul] + logos [word]. Pavel vede fiina uman ca o

unitate psihosomatic n care raiunea, emoia i funciile fizice sunt integrate total. Ne vom concentra atenia
asupra folosirii lui Pavel a cuvintelor kardia (inim), nous (minte), pneuma (duh), psyche (suflet,
via), sarx (carne) i eso anthropos (persoana luntric).
1. Psihologia Paulin n Studiul Modern.
Istoria cercatrii n fiecare dintre termenii amtropologiei lui Pavel a fost cronicat (prin 1970) de ctre R.
Jewett. Punctele urmtoare examineaz sursele principale care i-au preocupat pe cercettori n acest domeniu.
1.1. Dihotomie sau Trihotomie? Din zilele Prinilor Bisericii pn prin 1850 aceast ntrebare a fost n centrul
discuiilor despre antropologia lui Pavel: Este fcut omul din dou pri (trup i suflet) sau din trei pri (trup,
suflet i duh)? Prinii greci au favorizat-o pe cea de-a doua, pe cnd parinii Latini pe prima.Prin influena lui
Augustin i a reformatorilor Protestani, dihotomia a devenit un punct de vedere stabil n teologia din Vest; ns
dezbaterea a continuat (Bekouwer, 194-233; Hoekema, 204-10). ntr-o versiune a trihotomiei Dumnezeu ocup
duhul (persoana luntric) elibernd-o din sclavia sufletului (persoana exterioar) i de trup (persoana din
afar) i fcndu-le servile duhului. Dihotomia, ns, rmne punctul de vedere principal. J.G. Machen, de
exemplu, a afirmat c Biblia ntr-un mod indiscutabilrecunoate prezena a dou principii distincte sau
substane n om trupul i sufletul su (Machen, 143); suflet i duh denot aceeai realitate (Machen, 159-73).
Mai recent ns, Hoekema, a respins cuvntul dihotomie (a tia n dou), argumentnd c Biblia descrie
persoana uman ca o totalitate, un ntreg, o fiin unitar care n aceast via prezent nu prea poate fi tiat
(Hoekema, 210). Cadrul Antic. nvtura modern a insistat pe drept cuvnt ca antropologia lui Pavel s fie
interpretat prin lumina mediului su istoric i cultural.
1.2.1. Cadrul Elenistic. La nceputul acestui secol unii nvai au susinut c Pavel afost puternic
influenat de filozofia neebraic i religia popular, idei care probabil i-au fost meditate prin Iudaismul
Elenistic sau biserica Elenistic (vezi Elenism). Printre sugestiile n favoarea acestei increderi, sau
influene, sunt: (1) Folosirea lui Pavel a cuvntului sarkikos (i sarkinos, carnal), psychikos (fizic,
natura) i pneumaticos (spiritual), i mesajul su despre renoirea lui nous i mntuirea lui pneuma
prin gnosis (cunoatere) i sophia (nelepciune) n 1 Corinteni 2:6-16; 3:1-4; 5:5, arat datoria sa
pretins fa de gnosticism. (2) Tema paulin a beligerenei ntre sarx pneuma (Galateni 5:16-26;
Romani 8:1-17) revoc dualismul metafizic al lui Platon (duhul este bun, materia este rea) i are precedeni
n gnosticism i religii misterioase. (3) Distincia ntre eu-l exterior i eu-l interior (ex., 2 Cor 4:16) poate fi
urmrit pn la un dualism elenistic antropologic. Dar toate aceste preri au fost provocate.
1.2.2. Cadrul Ebraic. Cea de-a doua parte a secolului douzeci a fost martor la un acord savant n
cretere. (1) c Pavel a atendatat sau s-a opus fa de cea mai mare parte a nvturii neebraice de care el
pretinde c ar fi depins, i (2) c influenele decisive asupra lui (afar de Isus i Cretinismul timpuriu) au
fost Vechiul Testament i Iudaismul Palestinian (vezi Paul, the Jew). Unele dintre punctele cheie sunt: (1)
ca i n Vechiul Testament grija lui Pavel nu este natura uman ci relaia ei cu Dumnezeu (Jacob in Dihle et al.,
630-31; Stacey, 3). (2) Sarx la Pavel nu denot partea fireasc a omului mpotriva prii divine. n schimb,
ca i corespondentul su din Vechiul Testament basar, sarx semnaleaz diferena radical dintre Dumnezeu i
om, i relaia dintre ei; cuvntul trup descrie ntreaga persoan ca fiind o creatur slab, vulnerabil care
depinde n totalitate de Dumnezeu (Schweizer i Baumgartel, 123). (3) n marea majoritate a cazurilor la Pavel,
pneuma desemneaz nu duhul uman ci pe Duhul Sfnt sursa esenial pentru via i putere, la fel ca ruah
Yahweh n Vechiul Testament. Pneumatikos (ex., 1 Cor 2:15) identific o persoan care cunoate lucrarea de
Mntuire a lui Dumnezeu prin puterea Duhului lui Dumnezeu (Schweizer in Kleinknecht el al., 436). Trupul
spiritual (soma pneumatikon) trebuie neles nu ca ceva care este alctuit din pneuma, ci ca ceva care este
controlat de pneuma (Schweizer in Kleinknecht el al., 421; cf. ! Cor 15:44-45). (4) La Pavel, ca i n Vechiul
Testament kardia indic nucleul persoanei ca fiind o fiin raional, sentimental i volitiv (Baumgartel and
Behm 606-7; Jacob in Dihle et al., 626-28). (5) La Pavel psyche nu nseamn suflet, ci viaa sau existena
persoanei ca i n Geneza 2:7, i omul s-a fcut astfel un suflet viu [Ebr nepes, LXX psyche]. Psychikos (1
Cor 2:14) indic persoana natural lipsit de Duhul lui Dumnezeu. n mod corespunztor, toi care sunt n
Adam i care experimenteaz viaa i moartea existenei prezente posed un trup natural (soma psychikon; !
Cor 15:42-46). (6) Termenii antropologici folosii de Pavel, sunt adnc nrdcinai n Ve 10 i Efes 4:22-24
[mpreun cu referinele la Adam i Cristos n Rom 5: 12-21 i 1 Cor 15:21-22, 45-47]).
1.2.3. O ndatorire Dubl. Recunoscnd mpletitura gndirii greceti i ebraice din zilele lui Pavel, i dndu-i
seama de cele dou mpletiri, muli savani cred c antropologia lui datoreaz ceva fiecreia dintre ele.

(1) Unii detecteaz o schimbare n scrierile lui Pavel dintr-o privelite iudaic spre o perspectiv elenistic. ntro lucrare despre antropologia lui Pavel publicat n 1872, H. Ludermann argumenteaz c rscumprarea
menionat n Galateni (elocvent dintr-o perspectiv ebraic timpurie a lui Pavel) rscumprarea era o
transformare fizic-moral din trup n duh prin comuniunea cu Duhul Sfnt (Ellis, 24). ntr-un articol
publicat n 1934, C. H. Dodd a argumentat c escatologia lui Pavel a devenit mai puin ebraic i mai mult
elenist ntre scrierile din 1 Corinteni 15 (renvierea trupului spiritual la revenirea lui Isus) i 2 Corinteni 5
(primirea unei case eterne n cer la moarte; cf. Ellis, 32).
(2) Unii observ n scrieri o tensiune continu ntre elementele ebraice i elenistice. Conform lui Bultmann,
Pavel se opune unor noiuni gnostice apreciate (cum ar fi devalorizarea trupului), dar vede o fisur att de
adnc n om, o mare ncordare ntre sine i sinenct el se apropie foarte mult de un dualism Gnostic
(Bultmann, 1.199). n mod similar, spune Bultmann, n timp ce Pavel la nceput folosete psyche n Vechiul
Testament cu sensul de via sau persoan, folosirea de ctre el a termenului ntr-un neles depredicativ
n contrast cu pneuma trdeaz o influen gnostic (Bultmann, 1.204).
(3) Concepia mai general a lui W. D. Stacey (Stacey, 39) este c antropologia lui Pavel a fost fundamental
cretin; c el n general folosea limba ebraic (cum ar fi kardia i sarx) pentruc Evanghelia lui a izvort din
Vechiul Legmnt; cum c elenismul a oferit cteodat un termen mult mai adecvat (cum ar fi nous,
nelepciune, sau syneidesis, contiina moral); i c el nu inteniona s lege dou culturi (Iudaismul i
Elenismul) ci cuta s-i exprime punctul su de vedere cretin despre umanitate n cea mai bun limb
disponibil.
(4) R. Jewett argumenteaz c motivul principal pentru prezena elementelor elenistice n scrieri pe lng
elementele motenite din Vechiul Testament i Iudaism, este c Pavel, cu scopuri polemice, a mprumutat
frecvent termeni antropologici de la partenerii lui de conversaii, redefinindu-i pentru a-i potrivi argumentelor
lui dup nevoie (Jewett, 447).
1.2.4. Monism sau Dualism? Relatat la chestiunea precedent , se ridic ntrebarea dac antropologia lui Pavel
este monist sau dualist: sunt oamenii creai dintr-o singur substan sau dou (vezi Machen sub 1.1 sus), sau
aa dup cum prefer unii s pun ntrebarea, sunt sufletul i trupul indivizibile (dei conceptual remarcabile)
sau divizibile (dei ideal inseparabile)? Muli, probabil majoritatea savanilor contemporani au ales prima
opiune, alii au ales o form de monism. Un dualism cosmic sau escatologic sau moral este vzut la Pavel (vezi
Cosmology; Escatology), dar antropologia lui se spune c ar fi monistic, sau chiar fundamental (orice
eviden a dualismului este minim i neesenial, o urm a influenei Greceti, cf. discuiilor n Whiteley, 3234; Jewett, 82-95; Ridderbas, 29-32). Acesta este punctul de vedere, de exemplu, al lui Bultmann (Omul nu
este alctuit din dou pri [soma, psyche i pneuma], 1.209) iar din observaia lui Stacey (separarea lui psyche
de sarx nseamnextincia lui Pavel, Stacey, 126). Dou argumente sunt enumerate comun n susinerea
acestui punct de vedere: (1) n timp ce unele expresii ale iudaismului din zilele lui Pavel erau dualistice datorit
influenei greceti (Sjberg in Kleinknecht et al., 377; Lohse in Dihle et al., 635-37), antropologia Vechiului
Testament, sursa principal a gndirii lui Pavel asupra subiectului, este monistic. Iacob susine c distinciile
mai vechi ntre dihotomie i trihotomie trebuiesc abandonate n ceea ce privete antropologia Vechiului
Testament. Antropologia israelit este monisticUnitatea naturii umane nu este exprimat de conceptele
autentice ale trupului i sufletului ci de conceptele complementare i inseparabile ale trupului i vieii (Jacob in
Dihle et al., 631). (2) n acord cu nepes din Vechiul Testament (vezi 1.2.2. sus) psyche la Pavel nu denot
niciodat partea superioar a omului (Pavel niciodat nu leag soma i psyche ca fiind dou pri ale unui
ntreg) sau un suflet nemuritor, imaterial (Jewett, 334-46; Schweizer in Dihle et al., 650, 655-56; Guthrie,
165). Pavel nu poate concepe nici o existen viitoare uman dup moarteca i mod de existen fr soma,
i nu cunoate concepia greco-elenistic a imortalitii sufletului (eliberat din trup) (Bultmann, 1.192, 203;
cf. Ellis, 24). Aceast citire asupra lui Pavel a fost provocat de Gundry i Cooper. Conform lui Gundry
dualitatea antropologic i nu unitatea monadic, descrie cel mai bine punctul de vedere al lui Pavel
(Gundry, 79, 83): persoana ntreag (uman anthropos) este alctuit dintr-o latur corporal i una imaterial
(ale cror funcii diverse sunt descrise de: pneuma, psyche, kardia, nous, eso anthropos, etc.); exist o dualitate
ontologic, un pluralism funcional, i o unitate boltit (Gundry, 84; cf.156). Termenii lui Cooper pentru
antropologia paulin i biblic general (Cooper, 50, 179) sunt un holism funcional (contrar holismului
ontologic) i un dualism holistic (contrar monismului holistic). Unele argumente n favoarea acestei
concluzii sunt:

(1) La fel ca n Vechiul Testament, Pavel nfieaz umanitatea ca fiind un ntreg total integrat, n care
funciile psihologice i fizice sunt unite inexplicabil mpreun dar rmn distincte ontologic. Termenii pentru o
funcie material sau nematerial (cum ar fi soma sau pneuma) pot fi aplicai de sinedoc ntregii fiine; dar ce
reprezint ntregul nu este egal cu ntregul.
(2) n Vechiul Testament i la Pavel (la fel ca n majoritatea iudaismului intertestamental) persoanele nu sunt
doar distinse de trupurile lor pmnteti, sunt separabile de ele i pot continua s existe fr ele (Cooper, 77);
aa nva Pavel n 2 Corinteni 5:1-10; Filipeni 1:21-24. (Pentru aceste dou argumente, vezi Gundry, 177-56;
Cooper, 36-103, 147-72).
(3) Dualismul holistic al lui Pavel este total opus altor tipuri de dualisme n lumea antic (pentru c Gundry
prefer dualitate), n care sarx sau soma sunt n esenial rele, iar psyche sau pneuma sunt n esenial bune, i
salvarea const n eliberarea sufletului de trup. Pavel este nspimntat de o moarte fr trup (2Cor 5:15) pentru
c este nenatural i anormal, necesitnd o tiere n dou (o dihotomie) a ceea ce Dumnezeu a creat ca ntreg
(ceea ce ar putea explica de ce Pavel nu aplic psyche niciodat unei asemenea existene). Acea perioad este
ntr-adevr o stare intermediar; mntuirea final ateapt reintegrarea persoanei la nvierea trupului (1Cor
15:42-58; Fil 3:2021; vezi Gundry, 149-54, 159-83; Cooper, 89-103, 152-63, 173-95).
1.3. Gndirea Contemporan. Aceste eforturi de a-l interpreta pe Pavel n lumina din vremea lui este de
asemenea o mrturie pentru impactul curenilor moderni ai gndirii. O serie de micri intelectuale au format
percepiile psihologiei pauline.
1.3.1. Idealismul. Teologul F. C. Bauer care a trit n secolul IX, influenat de idealismul lui G. W. F. Hegel, a
susinut c rzboiul dintre sarx i pneuma a reprezentat conflictul dintre finit i relativ i infinit i absolut
(ridderbos, 16). Unii susintori ai panpsihismului ( o diversitate a monismului idealist conform cruia
persoana este alctuit dintr-un singur element metafizic-suflet, minte sau duh) cred n moartea trupului, dar i
n imortalitatea sufletului (Cooper, 21 n.36; 51 n.26; 236-37).
1.3.2. Liberalismul. H. Ldermann i H. J. Holtzmann caracterizeaz liberalismul clasic explicnd conflictul
dintre carne i duh n termeni etici duali: pentru ei sarx este omul exterior luptndu-se mpotriva omului
interior spiritual (Jewett, 52-55). Aadar duhul nu mai este privitca fiind antiteza finitului i a umanului
(ca la Baur), ci ca antipod a senzualului. Duhul [=nous] ca principiu raional prim n om trebuie s
dobndeasc victoria asupra naturii senzuale degradate (sarx) i s o menin supus (Ridderbos, 18).
1.3.3. Existenialismul. Bultmann argumenteaz c concepia Paulin despre conflictul ntre sarx i pneuma este
mult mai profund dect a realizat liberalismul. n Galateni 5 i Romani 8 pneuma face referin la Duhul
Domnului, nu la duhul uman (unde Pavel vorbete despre cel din urm, nu este un principiu superior n sine
sau un intelect special sau aptitudine spiritual a sa, ci pur i simplu sinele su 1.206); iar sarx nu este partea
senzual, degradat a sinelui ci sinele ntreg orientat nspre el nsui i independent de Dumnezeu o autocentralizare care se exprim prin rebeliune mpotriva lui Dumnezeu i prin zel pentru religie (Bultmann, 1.23246; cf. Fil 3:3-6; Schweizer i Baumgartel, 131-34). Fiecare persoan trebuie s decid dac vrea s triasc
dup felul crnii (independent ncreztor n propriile sale puteri, cutnd sfritul cuiva pentru a se slvi pe
sine) sau s triasc dup felul Domnului (n care Dumnezeu este centrul ateniei i este recunoscut ca fiind
sursa vieii i a puterii, iar Cristos n locul sinelui (eu-lui) devine obiectul credinei i al laudei).
1.3.4. Materialismul. n aceast form a monismului (opus idealismului, vezi 1.3.1. sus) se crede c oamenii
sunt alctuii numai din materie i funciile ei. De exemplu, n comportament i epifenomenalism, mintea i
sufletul nu sunt mai mult dect o combinaie aunor stri cauzate de creier (Cooper, 18-19).
1.3.5. Psihologia. Prin exegeza psihologic G. Theissen caut s descopere relevana lui Pavel la dezbaterile
curente n domeniul psihologiei. De exemplu, deoarece religia necesit o confruntare cu subcontientul, este
avantajos s explore asemenea subiecte cum ar fi dezvluirea inimii la judecata din urm (1Cor 4:1-5; Rom
2:16); elucidarea limbii subcontientului (limbii) prin interpretare i profeie
(1 Cor 14); i iluminarea cretin (prin Evanghelie i prin Duhul) ca mijloc prin care materiile cufundate n
subcontient (Fil 3:4-6) sunt aduse la cunotin (Rom 7:7-23; 1 Cor 2:6-16), ameninrile lor fiind ndeprtate
i aspectele benefice nrolate n slujba lui Cristos.
1.3.6. Monism contra Dualism. Nici monismul idealismului care reduce persoana la un suflet, nici monismul
materialismului care reduce persoana la un trup nu este compatibil cu Pavel. Nici nu sunt aceste forme
contemporane ale dualismului care ncurajeaz (1) mntuirea sufletului i deprecierea trupului,
(2) neatenia la unitatea psihosomatic a persoanei i (3) o dihotomie ntre har i natur (cf. Hoekema, 222-26).

Tot odat diagnosticul care fuzioneaz dualisme ilegale cu distincia dintre trup-suflet este greit (Cooper,
209,cf. 198-209).
1.4. Poziia Prezent. Aceast seciune poate fi ncheiat indicnd poziia din care acest capitol este scris.
(1) De mult timp nvaii au dezbtut punctul pn la care scrierile atribuite lui Pavel pot fi folosite ca surse ale
propriei sale gndiri. De exemplu, Jewett, exclude Coloseni, Efeseni i Pastoralele din analizele sale; Bultmann
exclude pe cele cinci i 2 Tesaloniceni. Urmtoarea dezbatere face socoteala la toate cele treisprezece scrieri. Un
studiu mai profund trebuie s considere cum se relateaz distribuirea i folosirea termenilor la ntrebarea
paternitii.
(2) Pavel folosete termeni antropologici n contiena cadrelor elenistice i ebraice (ndatorirea sa la cea din
urm fiind mult mai mare), pentru singurul motiv de a propaga Evanghelia cretin i explicnd mntuirea n
Cristos (tot aa i Stacey, 235-41; cf. 1.2.3. sus). Pentru a reflecta aceast perspectiv termenii v-or fi anexai
mpreun ntr-un interes abordabil. O tratare mai detailat ar trebui s ntrebe: (i) ce descoper distribuirea
termenilor despre interesele teologice i pastorale ale lui Pavel i (controversal) ce lumin arunc aceste interese
asupra semnificaiei termenilor (cf. Jweett) ; i (ii) ce dezvluie ordinea cronologic a scrierilor despre
dezvoltrile n antropologia lui Pavel ?
(3) Psihologia paulin, la fel ca cea a Bibliei este mai mult practic dect tiinific (Wright in Brown et al.,
567); aceste scrieri nu nva o antropologie sau o psihologie teoretic i poate fi numit pre-filozofic
(Cooper, 112, 180). Dar dei Scriptura nu d o nvtur filozofic, totui asigur un cadru normativ pentru o
antropologie cretin (Cooper, 197). Privirea cu care psihologia paulin este cel mai mult compatibil este
dualitatea antropologic sau holismul funcional i dualismul holistic (vezi 1.2.4. i 1.3.6. sus). Va fi deci
necesar s se dea o oarecare atenie termenilor antropologici (remarcabil soma) tratai altundeva n acest volum.
2. Persoana ca i Creaie a lui Dumnezeu.
O consideraie a sinelui nainte de cdere ne va ajuta s nelegem mai bine ce spune Pavel despre impactul
pcatului i respectiv despre Cristos.
2.1. Diversitatea Persoanei n Unitate. n acord cu antecedenii Evrei i Greci, Pavel vede persoana ca fiind
corporal dar, i imaterial. Cuvntul an ? noastr muritoare (2 Cor 4:10-11). A fi absent n trup (1 Cor
5:3) este unul i acelai lucru cu a fi absent n carne (2 Cor 2:5; cf. Col 1:22 trupul Lui de carne).
Slbiciunea crnii (Gal 4:13-15) i epuul din carne (2 Cor 12:7) descrie aceleai infirmiti fizice (vezi
Healing, Sickness). Pavel descrie activitatea imaterial prin diveri termeni a cror semnificaii coincid
considerabil (Gundry, 156; Kummel, 43). Nu este nici o diferen semnificativ ntre prezena apostolului n
duh [pneuma] (1 Cor 5:3) i prezena lui cu inima [kardia] (1 Tes 2:17). Una judec i nelege cu mintea
[nous] (1 Cor 14:14-16), dar inima (kardia) poate fi la fel de luminat (2 Cor 4:6; Efes 1:18) i duhul
[pneuma] persoanei nelege lucrurile persoanei (2 Cor 2:11; cf. Efes4:23, duhul [pneuma] minii [nous]).
n 2 Corinteni 6:11-12 splanchna (versiunea NIV afeciune) i kardia sunt expresii sinonime de dragoste.
Ascultarea din inim [kardia] (Rom 6:17; 1 Tim 1:5) este la fel cu ascultarea din suflet [psyche] (Efes 6:6;
Col 3:23; versiunea NIV inim) i slujind n duhul meu (Rom 1:9; versiunea NIV din toat inima). A
rmnea n duhul [pneuma] nseamn a se lupta cu sufletul [psyche] (Fil 1:27) dei aici grija lui Pavel nu
este o psihologie personal ci scopul armoniei credinciosului.
Pavel distinge imaterialul i corporalul (pag 769). El vorbete despre a fi devotat lui Dumnezeu n trup [soma]
i duh [pneuma] (1 Cor 7:34); despre a fi absent n trup dar prezent n duh (1 Cor 5:3), i despre a fi separat
n persoan, dar nu n inim [kardia] (1 Tes 2:17 NRSV). El le cere cititorilor s se purifice de orice
ntinciune a crnii [sarx] i a duhului [pneuma] (2 Cor 7:1). Cu cele scrise mai sus unim distincia lui Pavel
ntre interior i exterior. Adevrata circumcizie nu este n afar ci nuntru, nu n carne ci n inim
(Rom 2:28-29). Duhul omului este n el (1Cor22:11). Anumite persoane se laud cu aparena exterioar dar
nu cu cea din inim (2 Cor 5:12 NRSV). Dimensiunea corporal mbrieaz ntr-un mod evident interiorul
dar totodat i exteriorul, organele ascunse ca i pe cele vizibile. Mai mult, Pavel descrie anumite funcii
nemateriale cu termeni care de asemenea ar mai putea denota organe ale trupului de exemplu, literalul kardia
(inima) sau splanchna (diferite intestine, ficatul, rinichii, plmnii sau inima; cf. Baumgrtel i Behm, 606-11;
Kster, 548-53). n lumina aceasta este nevoie ca dou puncte s fie accentuate egal. (1) Pavel niciodat nu
limiteaz o funcie imaterial la un anumit organ al trupului. n versetele citate mai sus, kardia nu simbolizeaz
literalul inim ci pentru ntreaga fiin interioar a omului n contrast cu partea sa exterioar (Baumgrtel i
Behm, 612). n 2 Corinteni 3:3 inima de carne nu este mai literal dect scrierea de mn a Duhului. Interesul

lui Pavel n splanchna nu este unul psihologic. Acesta este cel mai expresiv termen disponibil pentru a indica
sursa sentimental uman (Silva, 55); prin metonimie, Pavel se concentreaz asupra sentimentului nsui
(splanchna n Filimon 12 poate fi tradus cu inim sau dragoste, BAGD). (2) Pavel niciodat nu disociaz
imaterialul-interior de corporalul-interior. O parte esenial a sensului [i. e. literal] original a fost pstrat pn
la punctul n care splanchna afecteaz i exprim personalitatea total pn la cel mai adnc nivel (Kster,
555). Tot aa i kardia ia aceeai poziie pentru ntreaga persoan dinuntru n ambele dimensiuni: corporal
i imaterial. Astfel frica, suprarea sau bucuria face ca inima s bat mai rapid.
2.2 Unitatea Persoanei n Diversitate. Diversitatea sinelui n unitate trebuie inut n vedere n continuare. Dar
accentuarea este mult mai mare n scrierile lui Pavel asupra sinelui ca un ntreg integrat.
La Pavel kardia este integrarea centrului uman ca o fiin raional, emotiv i voitoare (Dunn 1988, 100; cf.
2.1. sus; Baumgartel and Behm, 612; Ladd, 475). Astfel inima poate fi luminat (Efes 1:18); poate experimenta
suferin (2 Cor 2:4); i din inim vine ascultarea (Rom 6:17).
Deseori Pavel denot ntregul sine prin intermediul unor termeni care n alte contexte desemneaz un aspect sau
o dimensiune a sinelui. Fcnd aa, el nu contrazice alte ntrebuinri sau s confunde parialul cu ntregul. Mai
degrab, prin sinecdoc el privete ntreaga persoan dintr-un punct de vedere anumit, sau accentueaz
contribuia unui aspect anumit la funcionarea ntregului.
A prezenta trupurile [somata] ca jertfe vii (Rom 12:1) sau a-i oferi membrele (Rom 6:13, 19; versiunea
NIV pri ale trupului) nseamn a v oferi pe voi niv (Rom 6:13, 16). n Romani 12:1 soma denot
persoana n corporalitatea ei, n relaia ei concret n mijlocul acestei lumi; pentru c este trup, poate omul
experimenta lumea i se poate relata la alii (Dunn 1988, 709; cf. Gundry, 50). Totui soma nu este echivalent
cu ntreaga persoan; mintea i voina sunt active n oferirea trupului (Rom 12:1-2)
ntr-un mod asemntor sarx poate indica ntreaga fiin uman sau toat umanitatea (vezi Flesh) n anumite
privine ca fiine care (1) prin natur sunt dependente, limitate i slabe (Rom 6:19; carnea i sngele, Gal
1:16; 1 Cor 15:50; Efes 6:12; (2) devizarea i aderarea la anumite standarde (nu muli nelepi conform crnii,
1 Cor 1:26); (3) aparine unei linii de descendeni (ex. Rom 1:3; 4:1; 9:3); i (4) atitudinea n relaia cu alte
fiine umane i cu Dumnezeu (Fil 16, i n chip firesc i n Domnul; Rom 3:20). n nici unul dintre aceste
pasaje sarx nu este nfiat ca aparinnd pcatului (dar vezi 3 jos; cf. 1.2.2. sus; Thiselton, 674-75).
Psyche (suflet n exemplele precedente) poate de asemenea indica ntreaga viaa a cuiva sau, prin metonimie,
ntreaga persoan. Astfel, n dragostea noastr fierbinte pentru voi, eram gata s v dm nu numai Evanghelia
lui Dumnezeu, dar chiar i viaa noastr [psychai] (1 Tes 2:8). Epafrodit a fost aproape de moarte pentru
lucrul lui Cristos, i i-a pus viaa n joc [psyche] (Fil p 2:30): ntreaga sa via pmnteasc sau natural a fost
n pericol, nu numai sufletulsu (vezi Rom 2:9; 11:3; 13:1; 16:4;
2 Cor 1:23). Asemenea ntrebuinare este pur ebraic (Jacob in Dihle et al., 620). Ca i soma, psyche
desemneaz persoana dintr-un punct de vedere anumit: omul fiind o persoan care gndete, lucreaz i simte
(Ladd, 460); eu-l, persoan sau personalitateomul ntreg, cu tot ceea ce crede, sper i se strduie (Harder,
683). ntr-un mod asemntor nous poate nsemna omul ntreg gnditor, omul ca i creatur capabil de
nelegere (Guthrie, 169).
n timp ce corporalul i imaterialul sunt distinse, activitatea dinamic ntre ele mrturisete unitatea persoanei.
Distincia ntre soma i psyche este strict antropologic i nu etic: trupul nu este inerent ru (este o parte bun a
creaiei bune a lui Dumnezeu); iar sufletul nu este un sine mai nalt care este protejat prin natur de ispit i
pcat. Mai mult, n creaie sufletul, departe de a fi destinat s stpneasc sau s se elibereze din trup, i
mplinete scopul cu exactitate n relaie cu trupul. Viaa indicat de psyche este o existen a trupului - care
ajut s explice de ce psyche poate fi angajat de ctre sinecdoc pentru ntreaga persoan. Psyche este vitalitatea
persoanei din punctul de vedere al trupului i crnii sale (Ladd, 460), ca i cu nepes n Vechiul Testament
(vezi Jacob in Dihle et al., 620). Din cauza interpretrii lor sufletul este o animare a trupului iar trupul este
ncarnarea sufetului. Sufletul are un trup iar trupul are un suflet i omul pentru a fi ntreg este construit din
ambele, o unitate psiho-fizic (Gundry, 121).
Tot la fel se poate spune despre trup i duh. Pavel nu privete pneuma ca o scnteie divin ncarcerat n fizic,
sufletul mainriei (Dunn in Kamlah et al., 694). Eu-l care ca i duh, experimenteaz o comuniune cu
Dumnezeu este o fiin cu trup. n momentul n care Pavel distinge soma de pneuma el le unete n devotament
cu Cristos (1 Cor 7:34). Mntuirea mbrieaz deodat i trupul (1 Cor 6:12-20; 15) i duhul (1 Cor 5:5). ntrun mod asemntor oferind soma solicit renoirea lui nous (Rom 12:1-2).

Pavel de asemenea leag carnea (sarx ca i sinonim al lui soma) de duh. Ambele trebuiesc purificate dac
persoana este s devin sfnt (2 Cor 7:1). Este instructiv s se alture dou texte: N-am avut linite [anesim]
n duhul meu [pneuma], fiindc n-am gsit pe fratele meu Tit (2 Cor 2:13); Cci i dup venirea noastr n
Macedonia, trupul nostru [sarx] n-a avut nici o odihn [anesin]. Am fost necjii n toate chipurile: de afar
lupte, dinluntru temeri (2 Cor 7:5). Duhul i carnea nu sunt interschimbabile: turbulena luntric
(pneuma) afecteaz exteriorul (sarx); Pavel i alege cu grij termenii dup un model de dualitate
antropologic (Gundry, 144). Totui el descrie o experien; ngrijorarea sa pentru Tit i Corinteni l afecteaz
n ntregime.
1 Tesaloniceni 5:23, cu treismul su duh [pneuma], suflet [psyche] i carne [soma], pare s mpart persoana
n trei pri. Dar intenia lui Pavel era de fapt exact invers: Dumnezeul pciis v sfineasc El nsui pe
deplin [holoteleis]; i duhul [holokleron] vostru, sufletul vostru i trupul vostru s fie pzite ntregi fr prihan
la venirea Domnului nostru Isus Cristos. Departe de a diseca persoana, Pavel i exprim ndejdea c
credincioii, prin lucrarea de sfinire a lui Dumnezeu, sunt salvai de la dezintegrare i c au perseverat ca nite
fiine ntregi (holos). El mbin cei trei termeni mpreun (aici doar n scrisorile sale) mai mult pentru
accentuare dect pentru definire (Guthrie, 165; cf. Deut 6:5; Mat 22:37).
2.3. Experiena Persoanei despre Cunoatere. Ca i creaturi fcute n imaginea divin, oamenii au o capacitate
unic pentru a-L cunoate pe Dumnezeu. Cunoaterea determin folosirea lui nous. Mintea mea tie c Legea
este bun i dorete s-o mplineasc (Rom 7:14-23). Decizii despre zile speciale convocate pentru deliberri
raionale: Fiecare s fie deplin ncredinat n mintea lui (Rom 14:5). Inima (kardia) de asemenea are capaciti
intelectuale. Minile [noemata] le sunt ntunecate Israeliilor pentru c o nfram le acopere inima [kardia] (2
Cor 3:14-15) unde Pavel descrie nu efectul unui organ sau al al altuia, ci tocirea puterii cognitive a inimii
cuiva (kardiai i noemata sunt din nou apropiate paralel n Filip 4:7). Dac adevrul despre Dumnezeu se
dorete s fie apucat, kardia trebuie s fie luminat (2 Cor 4:1-6; Efes 1:17-19). Mai mult, contiina
(syneidesis) ia hotrri raionale cnd evalueaz aciunile cuiva (Rom 2:15).
Dar a cunoate nu este pur cognitiv. La Pavel nous-ul este un loc al hotrrilor morale ale cror deliberri
ntotdeauna afecteaz voina (Behm, in Behm and Wrthwein, 958-59; Ladd, 476; Bultmann, 1.211). Renoirea
nous-ului este necesar pentru a cunoate i a face voia lui Dumnezeu (Rom 12:1-2). A fi cineva convins n
mintea lui afecteaz comportamentul (Rom 14:1-8) i se transform ntr-o via de sfinenie (Ef 4:20-32). ntrun mod similar phroneo denot o atitudine a minii care gsete exprimare n voin (Bultmann, 1.214). Odat
ce atitudinea credinciosului este ca i a lui Cristos (Filip 2:2, 5, unde phroneo se ntmpl de trei ori), ei vor
deveni asculttori ca i El (Filip 2:6-11). Cnd cretinii se gndesc la lucrurile de sus (Col 3:2, phroneo),
purtarea lor va deveni sfnt (Col 3:5-17). Umblarea (phronema) dup lucrurile firii sau ale Duhului (Rom
8:6-7) determin un nou mod de via (Rom 8:1-17). Perspicacitatea lui kardia este de asemenea legat de
conduit. Neamurile demonstreaz lucrarea Legii n inimile lor fcnd ceea ce cere legea (Rom 2:14-15).
Fiecare s dea dup cum a hotrt n inima lui (2 Cor 8:7). Ascultarea de nvtura apostolic vine din
inim (Rom 6:17). Pneuma desemneaz capacitatea sinelui cu trei feluri de cunoateri: Cunoaterea sinelui. n
adevr, cine dintre oameni cunoate lucrurile omului, afar de duhul [pneuma] omului, care este n el? (1 Cor
2:11). n aceast ntrebare pneuma reprezint dou modeluri ale sinelui. Sinele ntreg (ce cunoate duhul
omului, aceea omul cunoate) i dimensiunea interioar sau nematerial ale sinelui (duhul omului care este n
el). Cunoatere despre alii. mcar c n-am fost la voi cu trupul [soma], dar fiind de fa cu duhul
[pneuma]voi i duhul [pneuma] meu, fiind adunai laolalt (1 Cor 5:3-4). n timp ce distinge corporalul de
nematerial, Pavel spune c el nsui va participa n viaa bisericii, pneuma sa este prezent i activ prin
aciunea divinului pneuma, care lucreaz prin scrisoarea pe care Pavel o scrie. Cunoaterea despre Dumnezeu.
Galateni 6:18, Frailor harul Domnului nostru Isus Cristos s fie cu duhul vostru! este tot aa de cuprinztor
ca 1 Tesaloniceni 5:28, Harul Domnului nostru Isus Christos s fie cu voi cu toi! sau, dup cum am mai putea
spune, pneuma este acea dimensiune a sinelui prin care ntreaga persoan se angreneaz n comuniune cu
Dumnezeu: nsui Duhul [pneuma] adeverete mpreun cu duhul [pneuma] nostru c suntem copii ai lui
Dumnezeu; prin aciunea Duhului strigm, Ava adic: Tat! (Rom 8:16, 15). Tot aa n 1 Corinteni 5:5 (ca
duhul [pneuma] s fie mntuit) nu vorbete despre nematerial pn la excluderea corporalului (cf. 1 Cor 15) ci
despre ntreaga persoan ca fiind orientat nspre Dumnezeu (Fee, 212). (Despre oscilarea n folosirea lui
pneuma de ctre Pavel ntre persoane i un aspect sau o dimensiune a persoanei n comuniune cu
Dumnezeu, vezi Dunn in Kamlah et al., 693-94).

Exist un fel de cunoatere care se distinge de cognitiv. Fiindc, dac m rog n alt limb, duhul [pneuma]
meu se roag, dar mintea [nous] mea este fr rod (1 Cor 14:14). O asemenea rugciune nu este inteligibil
pentru judecat (a crei activitate este suspendat temporar), dar persoana este ntr-o comuniune sincer cu
Dumnezeu (Dac aducei laud lui Dumnezeu n duhul, 1 Cor 14:16) i este deci edificat (1 Cor 14:2, 4).
Vorbind din nou despre rugciune, Pavel afirm c pacea lui Dumnezeu, care ntrece orice pricepere [nous], v
va pzi inimile [kardiai] i gndurile [noemata] n Cristos Isus (Filip 4:7). Aceasta nu este o cunoatere
descriptiv despre pacea lui Dumnezeu (facultile lui noussunt suspendate), ci cunoaterea intim a acelei
realiti (pacea lui Dumnezeu este experimentat n inim). Pavel se roag pentru ca cretinii s cunoasc
[ginosko] dragostea lui Cristos, care ntrece orice pricepere [gnosis] (Ef 3:19).
3. Persoana n Robia Pcatului.
Pavel vorbete despre pcat (hamartia) ca fiind mai mult o putere dect o aciune. Pcatul este un tiran neruinat
care a ptruns n lumea noastr i i-a stabilit domnia prin pcatul lui Adam (Rom 5:12-21) i de atunci menine
ntreaga umanitate ntr-o robie teribil (Rom 3:9; 6:20; Gal 3:22). (Cnd hamartia va fi zugrvit de Pavel ca pe
o putere, Pcatul cu litere majuscule va fi folosit n urmtoarele).
La Pavel, la fel cu termenul echivalent i folosirea lui n Vechiul Testamnet, sarx semnaleaz neputina creaturii
(vezi 2.2 sus). Dar Pavel de asemenea ntrebuineaz sarx pentru a denota existena omului i atitudinea ca
opunere fa de, i n contradicie cu Dumnezeu cu Duhul lui Dumnezeu. (Bornkamm, 133; cf. Schweizer
and Baumgrtel, 132; Thiselton, 675-76). Sarx a jurat loialitate unei alte puteri: cu firea pmnteasc slujesc
legii Pcatului (Rom 7:25). Sarx al fiecrui om de la Adam ncoace, cu excepia Domnului Isus (Rom 8:3), a
fost stpnit i nrobit de Pcat.
Prin firea pmnteasc, Pcatul subjug ntreaga persoan. n grdina Eden cererea major a Pcatului prin
arpe, nu este dorina fizic ci raiunea uman i mndria (Gen 3:1-6); Eva este amgit prin iretenia arpelui
(2 Cor 11:3; 1 Tim 2:14). Deci, n timp ce lucrarea crnii [sarx] (Gal 5:19-21) include ceea ce noi am numi
pcate ale crnii cum ar fi imoralitatea sexual i beia, catalogul este dominat de pcate ale minii i duhului:
ur, ceart, gelozie, suprare, glcevi, nenelegeri, dezbinri i invidie (vezi Virtutes and Vices). Din nou,
prin sinecdoc Pavel folosete un termen pentru o parte a sinelui (sarx) pentru a desemna ntreaga persoan
vzut ntr-un anume fel, cu alte cuvinte n rebeliune mpotriva lui Dumnezeu i n robia puterilor ale acestui
veac ru (Gal 1:4), al crei stpn este Pcatul.
Prin urmare, nici pneuma nici nous nici kardia nu scap din strnsoarea Pcatului. Credincioii trebuie s se
purifice de orice ntinciune a crnii [sarx] i a duhului [pneuma] (2 Cor 7:1) asta nseamn corporal i
nematerial. Unde sarx se lupt mpotriva lui pneuma, sarx-ul uman este invariabil, incluznd dimensiunea sa
spiritual mpotriva divinului pneuma: cine seamn n firea pmnteasc [sarx], va secera din firea
pmnteasc putrezirea; dar cine seamn n Duhul, va secera n Duhul viaa venic (Gal 6:8; cf. 5:16-26).
Pneuma uman, departe de a oferi mntuirea, are nevoie ea nsi s fie mntuit (1 Cor 5:5; cf. Kmmel, 44).
(n Romani 8:10 pneuma .?
Duhul Sfnt). Pavel vorbete despre mintea [nous] crnii [sarx] (Col
2:18), aceasta nseamn, posedat de carne ca i unealt a Pcatului. Poziia moral a lui nous este determinat
de ceea ce l domin, sau de Duhul lui Dumnezeu sau de carne (Guthrie, 169). Cnd eram sub stpnirea
Diavolului (vezi Satan, Devil) cnd triam n poftele firii pmnteti [sarx], cnd fceam voile firii pmnteti
[sarx] i ale gndurilor noastre [dianoiai] (Ef 2:2-3). n acest text se pare c primul sarx este mai extins dect al
doilea, i c al doilea sarx i dianoiai reprezint dou ci plcerile crnii gsesc expresia senzual i
intelectual (cf. Ef 5:3-5, asemntor cu Gal 5: 22-23; Behm in Behm and Wrthwein, 966-67).
Dumnezeu a judecat pe cei care au nbuit adevrul prin accelerarea decderii lor n eroare: ei s-au dedat la
gndiri dearte, i inima [kardia] lor fr pricepere s-a ntunecat; fiindc n-au cutat s pstreze pe Dumezeu,
Dumezeu i-a lsat n voia minii [nous] lor blestemate (Rom 1:18-21,28). Prin tunecarea inimii lor fr
pricepere [asynetos] (1:21), Pavel vrea s spun c nu este doar lips de cunoatere[ci] un semn c omul n
adncul fiinei sale l respinge pe DumnezeuLipsa de discernmnt trebuie privit ca un comportament
culpabil (Goetzmann in Harder and Goetzmann, 132). Efectul mpietririi inimii este culpabil ignorana
(agnoia), o nelegere ntunecat [dianoia] i inutilitatea minii [nous] (Ef 4:17-18). n timp ce n Romani
1:14 anoetoi (necugetai) sunt cei simpli i needucai a cror putere de gndire este nedezvoltat, altundeva
la Pavel (Gal 3:1,3; Tit 2:3; 1 Tim 6:9) termenul denot hotrri religioase i morale adverse (Behm in Behm
and Wrthwein, 962). Simul cinstit i necinstit este deci tocit: pn i mintea [nous] i cugetul [syneidesis] le
sunt spurcate (Tit 1:15; cf. 1 Tim 4:2).

innd pasul cu unitatea minii i a voinei notate mai devreme (vezi 2.3 sus), un nous depravat (i o kardia
necugetat produc fiecare fel de rutate (Rom 1:18-32). Ostilitatea minii ctre Dumnezeu este legat de
lucrri rele (Col 1:21); cei a cror inimi sunt mpietrite i a cror nelegere este ntunecat probabil
svresc cu lcomie orice fel de necurie (Ef 4:18-19). Vorbirea ntre persoane despre [mini] stricate,
lipsite de adevr, inevitabil duce la invidie i lucruri de acest fel (1 Tim 6:3-5; cf. 2 Tim 3:8).
La Pavel folosirea lui soma (trup) nu-i aparine lui nsui ci unui stpn (Bornkamm, 131). Prin virtutea
creaiei, trupul aparine lui Dumnezeu dar n consecina Cderii el devine subiect al Pcatului. Trupul nu este
inerent pctos; trupul pcatului este trupul stpnit de Pcat (Rom 6:6; 5:12). O asemenea persoan de obicei
ofer pri ale trupului [lui/ei] Pcatului, ca instrumente ale ticloiei (Rom 6:13). Faptele crnii [soma]
care trebuiesc distruse sunt dedate s triasc dup felul crnii [sarx] (Rom 8:13). Trupul nu este destinat
pentru imoralitate sexual (vezi Sexuality) dar exact aa se comport ca i rob al Pcatului (1 Cor 6:12-20).
Psyche tot mai nseamn viaa natural dar o via ntr-o stare czut. Persoana natural (psychikos
anthropos) este incapabil s neleag realitile spirituale (1 Cor 2:6-16); trupul natural (soma psychikon)
este destinat pieirii (1 Cor 15:42-55).
Robia Pcatului nu ofer nici o scpare de responsabilitatea personal. Sinele nu rezist ci se supune repede
asaltului Pcatului. Prin nbuirea adevrului de ctre minte i neasculttoare a inimii Pcatul i stabilete i-i
menine autoritatea. Trupul se d pe sine nsui i ofer mdularele- n slujba Pcatului (Rom 1:32; 3:9,
19). Ca i aliat al Pcatului, (Rom 5:12-21), Moartea (vezi Life and Death) provoac dezintegrarea sinelui ntr-o
violare flagrant unirii n diversitatea magnific pe care Dumnezeu a
creat-o. n ciuda siguranei c a nu mai fi n trup [nseamn a fi] acas cu Domnul, lui Pavel i este team de o
existen far trup (2 Cor 5:1-10; vezi 1.2.4 sus). A.T.Lincoln observ c ce poate fi vzut aici nu este un
dualism antropologic ultim ci mai degrab o dualitate temporar introdus de pcat i moarte, care pn la
ridicarea harului mntuitor continu s tulbure ntreaga existen uman (Lincoln, 70).
4. Persoana ntregit.
Cristos i Duhul lucreaz s desfac i s inverseze ruina i distrugerea pe care Pacatul i Moartea le-a adus
asupra victimelor lor.
4.1. Noua Creaie. Primul om Adam a devenit o fiin vie [psychen zosan], ultimul Adam, un duh dttor de
via [pneuma zoopoioun] (1 Cor 15:45) i nu pneuma zon, duh viu (vezi Adam and Christ). Dunn
comenteaz, Contrastul este ntre om, recipientul suflrii de via care l constituie ca o fiin vie, i Cristos
dttorul de via al veacului care vine, viaa Duhului (Dunn 1980, 108). n plus, ca i primul Adam ultimul
Adam este o fiin atotcuprinztoare, un loc pentru o nou via (1 Cor 15:12-22, 48-49). Sinele vechi
(palaios anthropos) (Rom 6:6) umanitatea n Adam (Rom 15:12-21 este crucificat pentru ca oamenii s fie unii
cu Cristosul cel nviat (Rom 6:4-11). A-i pune noua umanitate trebuie s se mbrace n Cristos nsui (Rom
13:14; Gal 3:27). Noua umanitate [kainon anthropos] din Efeseni 2:15 este Cristosul corporal Cristos nsui
mpreun cu toi cei unii cu El n moarte i nviere. Pe aceast realitate este fondat imperativul etic: s v
dezbrcai de omul cel vechi [palaion anthropon], care se stric dup poftele neltoare, i s v mbrcai
n omul cel nou [kainon anthropon], fcut dup chipul lui Dumnezeu, n dreptatea i sfinenia adevrului (Ef
4:22-24; cf. Col 3:9-10).
Pentru a fi neles n acelai fel, dup prerea mea omul din luntru (ho eso anthropos) (Ef 3:16): aceast fraz
identific persoana n Cristos, n contrast cu natura exterioar, persoana n Adam i destinat pieirii. Chiar
dac omul nostru din afar [exo anthropos] se deterioreaz, totui cel dinuntru [eso] se noiete din zi n zi (2
Cor 4:16), anticipnd ntreaga realizare a noii umaniti n gloria cereasc
( 2 Cor 4:17-18: vezi Creation and New Creation). Prin acelai simbol omul dinuntru din Romani 7:22 este
echivalent cu noul sine implicat n Romani 6:6 (pentru aceast nelegere a omului dinluntru, vezi Barrett,
145-47; Dunn 1988, 394; Kim, 321-26). Alii (ex. Gundry, 135-40) folosesc sinele interior i exterior (ca fiind
distinct de sinele vechi i nou) pentru a denota aspectele nemateriale respectiv pe cele corporale.
4.2. Renoirea Persoanei. Persoana unit cu Cristos este transformat ntr-o fiin ntreag.
Moartea Pcatului (Rom 6:1-14) cauzeaz moartea crnii (Rom 8:1-17); vezi Dying and Rising). Pavel nu
vorbete niciodat despre scrierea lui sarx ci numai despre distrugerea lui. 1 Cor 5:5 nu vorbete neaparat despre
o moarte fizic a omului incestuos ci despre sfritul rebeliunii lui mpotriva lui Dumnezeu dup cum n
Galateni 5:24 Pavel cere rstignirea firii pctoase cu patimile i poftele ei (cf. Fee, 212; vezi Disciplina).
Legile i nvturile umane nu mpiedic ci ncurajeaz sarx-ul (Col 2:23). Puterea Duhului Sfnt este

esenial pentru nvingerea firii (Gal 5:22-26; Rom 8:1-17). Pavel dorete ca oamenii carnali, fireti (sarkinoi,
sarkikoi) care sunt vulnerabili fa de sarx ca i agent al Pcatului, s devin oameni spirituali (pneumatikoi)
dominai de Duhul, agentul lui Cristos ( 1 Cor 2:14-3:3). Unde Noul Testament difer de psihologia
comportamental este peste realitatea actual a lucrrii Duhului (Right in Brown et al., 568).
Deoarece kardia este centrul de integrare al persoanei, renoirea se face din inim nspre exterior. Dumnezeu
face ca lumina Evangheliei gloriei lui Cristos s strluceasc n inimile noastre ( 2 Cor 4:4-6). Aici este locul
unde Cristos locuiete (Ef 3:17), aici pacea Lui mprete (Col 3:15) i tot aici cretinii sunt luminai despre
scopul mntuitor al lui Dumnezeu (Ef 1:18). Inima este cea care primete Duhul Sfnt ( 2 Cor 1:22), n inim
Dumnezeu i toarn dragostea prin Duhul (Rom 5:5) i dintr-o inim curat vin faptele dragostei ( 1 Tim
1:5). ntr-un mod asemntor Cristos este cel care explic afeciunea (splanchna) lui Pavel pentru oamenii si
(Fil 1:8; Kster,556). Corespunznd adncimii angajamentului din trecut fa de Pcat, cretinii cred Evanghelia
n inim (Rom 10:9-10) i mplinesc nvtura apostolic din toat inima (Rom 6:17).
Ca i parte a aceluiai proces credincioii sunt transformai prin renoirea minii [nous] pentru descoperirea
voii bune, plcut i desvrit a lui Dumnezeu, i pentru ntrebuinarea darurilor sale n biseric (Rom 12:28; cf. Col 1:9-10). Oamenii odat nelai de nelepciunea veacului acestuia le este dat nelepciunea lui
Dumnezeu pentru nelegerea (chiar dac numai parial) a persoanei i lucrrii lui Cristos, i scopul mntuitor
al lui Dumnezeu pentru umanitate i creaie (1 Cor 1:18-2:16; Col 1:15-2:5; Ef 1:8-19). n locul mentalitii
inutile i a nelegerii ntunecate care au marcat existena lui Adam, persoanele ncorporate n Cristos sunt
renoii n duhul minii [lor] pentru a crete n adevrata dreptate i sfinenie (Ef 4:17-24). Legea minii
mele (Rom 7:23) este Legea lui Dumnezeu, la care mintea, de acum eliberat i d n ntregime aprobarea
(vezi 4.3 jos); atitudinea minii mprit de Duhul este capabil i voitoare s asculte de Legea lui Dumnezeu,
i s reziste asalturilor crnii (Rom 8:1-17).
Soma (trupul) prezent al credinciosului este muritor. Dumnezeu va distruge mncarea pe care o primete
stomacul, i stomacul nsui ( 1 Cor 6:13), pentru c trupul acesta aparine unei ordini pieritoare (1Cor 7:29-31;
15:42-44). Dar soma nsi este destinat pentru nviere (1 Cor 6:13-14; 15:20-23). La sfrit cele perisabile
(striccioase) vor fi mbrcate cu cele neperisabile (nestriccioase), iar trupul deczut al credinciosului va fi
transformat ntr-un trup de slav ca al lui Isus ( 1 Cor 15:42-52; Filip 3:20-21). Dar acest trup perisabil a fost
rscumprat de Isus i acum este chemat la slujire ( 1 Cor 6:12-20; Rom 6:11-23; 12:1). Mortalitatea trupului nu
ofer nici cea mai mic scuz pentru rsfarea poftelor sau oferirea acestora directivelor Pcatului.
Dat fiind unitatea sinelui n diversitate, experienele lui psyche i ale pneuma sunt ataate de cele ale lui soma.
Psyche tot mai denot viaa natural n ordinea prezent a existenei. Credinciosul nu mai este o persoan
natural (psychikos anthropos) ci spiritual (pneumatikos) ( 1 Cor 2:14-15); dar credinciosul pstreaz un
trup natura (soma psychikon), un alt nume pentru trupul muritor, coruptibil (1 Cor 15: 42-44). Psyche va
avea parte de transformare la sfrit (1 Tes 5:23). Pn atunci psyche nu este mai vulnerabil dect soma la
pericolele deteriorrii ordinii i la ispitele veacului acestuia. Dar la fel ca i cu trupul, aceast via este
chemat de Cristos n slujba Sa: Orice facei, s facei din toat inima [psyche], ca pentru Domnul, nu ca
pentru oameni (Col 3:23); ca nite robi ai lui Cristos, fcnd din inim [psyche] voia lui Dumnezeu (Ef 6:6);
eram gata s v dm viaa noastr [psychai] att de scumpi ne ajunseseri (1 Tes 2:8). Prin acelai
simbol dublu uman (pneuma) este destinat pentru mntuirea final (1 Cor 5:5;
1 Tess 5:23); poate nc experimenta pngrirea pcatului (2 Cor 7:1); poate deja experimenta o comuniune
profund cu Dumnezeu prin Duhul (Rom 8:16; 1 Cor 14:2, 14-15); i este, mpreun cu trupul, devotat n
slujirea lui Dumnezeu (1 Cor 7:34).
Deja am observat c robia Pcatului, departe de a permite scparea de responsabilitile personale, vine prin
cedarea voinei sinelui la cererea Pcatulu. Acelai lucru se adeverete (mutatis mutandis) pentru robii lui
Cristos. Problema deciziilor etice; credincioii vor rspunde pentru ei nii n ziua judecii
(1 Cor 3: 12-15; 2 Cor 5:10). Mai mult, dup cum Pcatul a exploatat unitatea sinelui n diversitate, tot aa i
Cristos cheam pentru dedicarea ntregii persoane la o via de ascultare. Dovada cunoaterii i adncimea
discernmntului este conduita cinstit (Filip 1:9-11; cf. Col 1:9-11).
4.3. Sinele Divizat. n cele din urm ne ntoarcem la Romani 7:14-25, un pasaj crucial pentru psihologia
paulin, i firete pentru ntreaga teologie a lui Pavel. Vom argumenta c aceste versete descriu lupta cretin,
una care este exclusiv cretin, i una n care Pavel i reprezint pe cretini n general. (Pentru o defens recent
a acestui punct de vedere vezi Dunn 1988, 387-99, 403-12; pentru alte puncte de vedere, vezi Moo, 448-98).

4.3.1. Dou Perspective ale Sinelui. Dintr-un anumit punct de vedere sinele este o fiin carnal. Cuvintele
adic n firea mea pmnteasc (Rom 7:18) servesc mai degrab pentru a defini dect a limita Eu aa cum
este conceput aici. Tot aa ar mai trebui s nelegem Romani 7:14. Din punct de vedere al participrii cuiva n
Adam (Rom 5:12-21) i vulnerabilitatea continu a cuiva fa de agenii Pcatului eu ca i cretin este nc tot
carnal (sarkinos) nc sub puterea pcatului (cf. 1 Cor 3:1). n spatele cuvintelor vndut pcatului (Rom 7:14)
st participiul perfect pepromenos [vndut], denotnd o condiie care a nceput nainte de convertire i trece n
experiena cretin. Dintr-un alt punct de vedere sinele este renoit. n aezarea legii minii [nous] mele
mpotriva legea pcatului care este n mdularele mele (Rom 7:23), Pavel nu descrie conflictul ntre dou
segmente ale sinelui. Mai degrab mintea mea desemneaz ntreaga persoan ca fiind renoit de Cristos i de
Duhul, i mdularele mele ntreaga persoan ca fiind ameninat de robia pcatului (Rom 7:25). Omul din
luntru (Rom 7:22) este sinele n Cristos ceva ce Pavel numete altundeva noul sine (omul nou) (vezi 4.1
sus); legea minii mele (Rom 7:23) este Legea lui Dumnezeu, la care persoana, de acuma renoit de Cristos,
se supune (Rom 8:1-8). Necredinciosul fcnd tot aa este afectat ntr-un mod contrar de folosirea legii de ctre
pcat, sau de motivele perverse ale cuiva (Rom 10:3). Dar pe cnd nous capitula naintea folosirii legii ntrun
mod seductor de ctre pcat (Rom 7:7-11; Gal 3:22-23), de acuma se mpotrivete (Rom 7:23). Pavel, cretinul
tie ce face, i nelege ce face (Rom 7:15) i de ce (Rom 7:17-18). ns el nu accept legitimitatea a ceea ce
face. Chiar i cnd cedeaz dictaturii pcatului, el respinge i detest ceea ce face, el recunoate c cererile
Pcatului sunt nelegitime (Rom 6).
4.3.2. Dou Tipuri de Robie. Un slujitor (diakonos) poate sluji la mai muli stpni, dar un rob (doulos) nu poate
(Mt 6:24). Dar lund n considerare Romani 7:25: astfel, deci, cu mintea, eu [autos ego] slujesc [douleo] legii
lui Dumnezeu, dar cu firea pctoas slujesc legii pcatului. Eu nsumi le face pe amndou, douleo
stpnete ambele pri ale propoziiei. Explicaia este c Eu nsumi particip n dou umaniti (reprezentate
de Adam i respectiv de Cristos) i n dou realiti ( veacul acesta ru i veacul viitor care are s vin). Eu sunt
capabil de a m dedica n totalitate fiecreia, nu ntr-un mod alternativ ci simultan. Aceast interpretare este
susinut de ordinul clauzei n Romani 7:24-25. Prima dat vine plnsul o, nenorocitul de mine! (Rom 7:24a)
i n sfrt necunoaterea divizrii n adncime a sinelui (Rom 7:25b) ntre ele st ntrebarea cine m va scpa
de acest trup de moarte? (Rom 7:24b) i exclamarea mulumesc lui Dumnezeu, prin Isus Cristos, Domnul
nostru! (Rom 7:25a). Aceast referire semnificativ i negreit la experiena cretin este integrat discuiei
prezente, i nu anexat ei. Plngerea din Romani 7:24 este relatat ntr-un mod mai cumptat n Romani 7:25b.
Verbul din Romani 7:24 (rhysetai) este un viitor adevrat: Isus Cristos m va rscumpra din acest trup de
moarte la nvierea morilor (Rom 6:5-8; 8:10-11). Nu este doar o lupt mpotriva pcatului (Rom 7:25b) care
explic suferina (Rom 7:24a). A fi gustat deja mntuirea creaz o dorin care nu este satisfcut pe deplin
pn cnd nu nc devine o realitate (Rom 8:18-25; 13:11-14). Sigurana unei scpri eventuale previne ca
suferina s degenereze n disperare, i divizia n sine arat c pcatul este respins cu eficacitate n anticiparea
victoriei finale (vezi Eschatology).
tradus din Dictionary of Paul and his Letters , (pag. 765-775)
Editors: Gerald F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin, Daniel G. Reid
A compendium of contemporary biblical scolarship
Autor Traductor J.K.Chamblin Matei Adrian Suparare
Not: Textele biblice au fost traduse folosind versiunea Cornilescu i Biblia Triunghi
INTRUPAREA CUVANTULUI
(Ioan 1:14)
Si Cuvantul s-a facut trup si a locuit printre noi, plin de har si de adevar. Si noi am privit slava Lui, o slava
intocmai ca slava singurului nascut din Tatal.
Vedem ca Ioan nu porneste de la premiza ca toti sunt copii ai lui Dumnezeu, din vreun motiv sau altul. Biblia se
opune acestei idei preconcepute, cum am vazut in Mat.3 si Ioan 8. Dumnezeu se opune iluziilor in acest sens.
Poti insa sa ai acest drept! Primeste-l pe El!
- Cine ne da DREPTUL de a ne numi asa? Sau ce da dreptul unui om sa se numeasca asa (13). Vedem ca Ioan
nu porneste de la premiza ca toti sunt copii ai lui Dumnezeu, din vreun motiv sau altul. Biblia se opune acestei

idei preconcepute, cum am vazut in Mat.3 si Ioan 8. Dumnezeu se opune iluziilor in acest sens. Poti insa sa ai
acest drept! Primeste-l pe El!
Acum Ioan ne initiaza intr-un alt mister al Dumnezeirii. Uniunea celor doua naturi intr-una singura. Pana acum
ne-a furnizat o bogatie de argumente/dovezi in favoarea DUMNEZEIRII Cuvantului (era la inceput, a creat, este
viata oamenilor, lumina lor, etc.) dar acum ne prezinta UMANITATEA Lui. Iata cum se formuleaza cele doua
crezuri fundamentale ale Bisericii Crestine: Isus este cu adevarat Dumnezeu si este om cu adevarat. El este om
cu desavarsire si este cu desavarsire, Dumnezeu. Cum aceste doua naturi (realitati) se combina intr-una singura
ramane inca misterios, dar aceasta nu ar trebui sa ne retina de la a cerceta incarnarea Lui, in detaliu, pe cat
posibil intr-un singur studiu, fiindca numai in incarnare se realizeaza acest miracol nemaiauzit. Nu putem
neglija aceasta sarcina, deoarece asa cum ne-a demonstreaza istoria, altii vor incerca sa o explice in feluri care
conduc la confuzie si eroare. Studiind intruparea lui Isus, studiem din nou Persoana Sa si intentia noastra ar
trebui sa fie sa-l stim cat mai bine. Sa cunoastem cat ne spune ca se poate cunoaste despre El aceasta carte:
Biblia. Gresind in domeniul "cristologiei", un om chiar daca are conceptii corecte in oricare alt domeniu biblic,
nu poate fi un crestin pentru ca pur si simplu nu-l cunoaste pe adevaratul Hristos si crede o doctrina a unuia
fals!
EXPLICATII ALTERNATIVE ALE INCARNARII
Acum Ioan ne initiaza intr-un alt mister al Dumnezeirii. Uniunea celor doua naturi intr-una singura. Pana acum
ne-a furnizat o bogatie de argumente/dovezi in favoarea DUMNEZEIRII Cuvantului (era la inceput, a creat, este
viata oamenilor, lumina lor, etc.) dar acum ne prezinta UMANITATEA Lui. Iata cum se formuleaza cele doua
crezuri fundamentale ale Bisericii Crestine: Isus este cu adevarat Dumnezeu si este om cu adevarat. El este om
cu desavarsire si este cu desavarsire, Dumnezeu. Cum aceste doua naturi (realitati) se combina intr-una singura
ramane inca misterios, dar aceasta nu ar trebui sa ne retina de la a cerceta incarnarea Lui, in detaliu, pe cat
posibil intr-un singur studiu, fiindca numai in incarnare se realizeaza acest miracol nemaiauzit. Nu putem
neglija aceasta sarcina, deoarece asa cum ne-a demonstreaza istoria, altii vor incerca sa o explice in feluri care
conduc la confuzie si eroare. Studiind intruparea lui Isus, studiem din nou Persoana Sa si intentia noastra ar
trebui sa fie sa-l stim cat mai bine. Sa cunoastem cat ne spune ca se poate cunoaste despre El aceasta carte:
Biblia. Gresind in domeniul "cristologiei", un om chiar daca are conceptii corecte in oricare alt domeniu biblic,
nu poate fi un crestin pentru ca pur si simplu nu-l cunoaste pe adevaratul Hristos si crede o doctrina a unuia
fals!
EBIONISM - separa dumnezeirea de Persoana umana a lui Isus - doar un om!
DOCETISM - parea om, dar nu era in realitate om. Separatia dintre umanitate si dumnezeire GNOSTICISM Isus avea un trup dintr-o substanta spirituala nu din materie. (o fantoma!). Cele doua elemente, uman sI divin nu
se aflau in Persoana Lui. Separarea atat a dumnezeirii cat si a umanitatii..
DOCETISM - parea om, dar nu era in realitate om. Separatia dintre umanitate si dumnezeire GNOSTICISM Isus avea un trup dintr-o substanta spirituala nu din materie. (o fantoma!). Cele doua elemente, uman sI divin nu
se aflau in Persoana Lui. Separarea atat a dumnezeirii cat si a umanitatii..
ARIANISM - Arius, prezbiter al Bisericii din Alexandria (trait 256-336).Fiul a fost creat!? Apartinea creatiei nu
dumnezeirii!
Explicatii gresite ale felului in care cele doua elemente, uman si divin s-au combinat in Persoana Sa:
APOLINARIANISM - (310-390 AD) Apolinarius, suporter entuziast al lui Atanasie...La incarnare, Dumnezeu
Fiul ...locuinta intr-un trup omenesc, in locul sufletului omenesc. Nu poseda o natura umana completa: tendinta
docetica.
Explicatii gresite ale felului in care cele doua elemente, uman si divin s-au combinat in Persoana Sa:
NESTORIANISM - Nestorius, in 428 Arhiepiscopul Constantinopolelui. Dorind sa conserve umanitatea lui Isus
a sustinut separarea celeor doua naturi in Persoana lui Hristos, punand la indoiala unitatea Persoanei Lui.
Zadarnicea incarnarea sI periclita mantuirea! In 431, inlaturat din post si devine un zelos misionar.
EUTICHIANISM - Eutichius, oponent inversunat al nestorianismului, a sustinut cu tarie unitatea Persoanei lui
Hristos, incat acesta sa fie in loc de doua naturi diferite o singura natura compusa. Un fel de a treia fiinta
amalgamata, nici om cu adevarat si nici Dumnezeu cu adevarat! Condamnat la Sinodul de la Constantinopole in
448 dar reabilitat, (dubios) in Efes in 449.
Pe vremea aceea...EBIONISM, DOCETISM, GNOSTICISM, ARIANISM, APOLINARIANISM,
NESTORIANISM, EUTICHIANISM....Astazi?

Fiindca nu se mai putea continua asa in 451 d.H. se intruneste Conciliul de la Calcedon pentru a pune capat
disputelor. Acolo s-au formulat expresiile care constituie bazele oricarei declaratii ortodoxe de credinta cu
privire la Persoana lui Hristos, de atunci incoace. Formula de baza ar suna, din engleza, cam asa:
"...noi marturisim ca Domnul nostru Isus Hristos este unul si acelasi Fiu...perfect in Dumnezeirea Lui...perfect
in Umanitatea Lui...avand o singura faptura cu Tatal (homoousios) in Dumnezeire, homousios (de aceasi)
faptura cu noi...aratat in doua naturi (physeis), fara confuzie, fara schimbare, fara diviziune si fara
separare...proprietatea fiecarei naturi fiindu-i pastrata si fiind concurenta intr-o singura persoana (prosopon) si
intr-o singura existenta (hypostasis).
Aceasta este Intruparea: uniunea intr-o singura persoana (hypostasis), a unei naturi complet umane si a uneia
complet divine. La Calcedon, Biserica a exprimat aceasta uniune: cele doua naturi devin una in unica
existenta/faptura a lui Isus Hristos. Aceasta formula straveche afirma ca desi in uniunea hipostatica fiecare din
aceste naturi si-au pastrat proprietatile esentiale, a existat totusi o comuniune veritabila intre cele doua naturi
astfel incat proprietatile uneia i-au fost comunicate celeilalte.
"Si fara indoiala, mare este taina evlaviei (religiei noastre)...cel ce-a fost aratat in trup, a fost dovedit neprihanit
in Duhul, a fost vazut de ingeri, a fost propovaduit printre Neamuri, a fost crezut in lume, a fost inaltat in
slava!"
"Si fara indoiala, mare este taina evlaviei (religiei noastre)...cel ce-a fost aratat in trup, a fost dovedit neprihanit
in Duhul, a fost vazut de ingeri, a fost propovaduit printre Neamuri, a fost crezut in lume, a fost inaltat in
slava!"
Cuvantul folosit in greceste pentru "am vazut" este "theasthai". Este utilizat de foarte multe ori in NT cu referire
la vederea fizica propriu-zisa. Prin aceasta Ioan ne spune ca acest Cuvant a venit pe pamant in forma unui om si
a fost vazut de ochi omenesti. E ca si cum el ar spune: "Daca vreti sa vedeti acel cuvant creator, cum este el,
atunci priviti la Isus din Nazaret".
*Acesta este saltul in gandirea oamenilor pe care intruparea lui Isus Hristos l-a facut. Pentru lumea greaca acest
lucru era de neconceput fiindca la ei Dumnezeu nu s-a atins de creatie, iar aici Ioan spune ca Dumnezeu s-a
intrupat! Dumnezeul distant de creatie, sa ia forma unui om? Ce spune Ioan e prea mult pentru filozofia greaca a
vremii, dar este ceea ce Isus a fost si inseamna pentru el!
TRUPUL O TEMNITA? O MISIUNE DE SALVARE FOARTE DEOSEBITA
Cuvantul folosit in greceste pentru "am vazut" este "theasthai". Este utilizat de foarte multe ori in NT cu referire
la vederea fizica propriu-zisa. Prin aceasta Ioan ne spune ca acest Cuvant a venit pe pamant in forma unui om si
a fost vazut de ochi omenesti. E ca si cum el ar spune: "Daca vreti sa vedeti acel cuvant creator, cum este el,
atunci priviti la Isus din Nazaret".
*Acesta este saltul in gandirea oamenilor pe care intruparea lui Isus Hristos l-a facut. Pentru lumea greaca acest
lucru era de neconceput fiindca la ei Dumnezeu nu s-a atins de creatie, iar aici Ioan spune ca Dumnezeu s-a
intrupat! Dumnezeul distant de creatie, sa ia forma unui om? Ce spune Ioan e prea mult pentru filozofia greaca a
vremii, dar este ceea ce Isus a fost si inseamna pentru el!
Pentru greci trupul era o temnita in care spiritul era inchis. Sa le spui ca Dumnezeu de bunavoie a venit intr-un
trup era o idee socanta pentru ei.
- Filozoful grec Philo din Alexandria a spus ca, "Dumnezeu nu s-a coborat la noi si nici nu a ajuns sa depinda de
necesatatile trupului".
- Filozoful grec Philo din Alexandria a spus ca, "Dumnezeu nu s-a coborat la noi si nici nu a ajuns sa depinda de
necesatatile trupului".
- Marele imparat roman, stoicul Marc Aureliu isi exprima dispretul sau fata de trup in comparatie cu spiritul.
"Dispretuiti trupul, carnea si oasele, reteaua complicata de nervi, vene si artere - alcatuirea trupului supusa
putrezirii", spunea el.
- Mai tarziu, sfantul Augustin spunea ca inainte de convertirea lui i-a citit si i-a studiat pe marii filozofi pagani
ai vremii dar de la nici unul nu a putut sa auda asa ceva: si anume ca Dumnezeu creatorul tuturor lucrurilor a
luat trupul unei fiinte facute de El pentru indeplinirea planului Sau mantuitor. Trebuie sa recunoastem ca este
INGENIOS! Sa ia trupul uneia dintre creaturile pe care vrea sa le salveze? Asta, misiune de salvare!
Aceasta este implinirea vremii care a venit despre care Pavel vorbeste in Gal.4:4, cand "Dumnezeu a trimis pe
Fiul Sau, nascut din femeie, nascut sub Lege, ca sa rascumpere pe cei ce erau sub Lege, pentru ca sa capatam
infierea". Atunci Dumnezeu a ales sa treaca la implinirea planului Sau de mantuire. Prima actiune din aceasta

misiune de salvare a fost intruparea Cuvantului Sau.

Aceasta este minunea si surpriza ideii si actului intruparii: ca Dumnezeu putea si devenea trup; ca Dumnezeu
intra in aceasta viata pe care noi oamenii o traim limitandu-se in timp si spatiu pentru ca ochii oamenilor sa-l
poata vedea si sa nu moara. (doar asa puteau sa-l "vada"!). Creatorul aparea in mijlocul creatiei Sale intr-un fel
in care aceasta sa-l poata vedea si cunoaste. De aceea aproape de incheierea acestei misiuni El a putut spune cu
satisfactie: "Am facut cunoscut numele Tau, oamenilor pe care Mi i-ai dat din lume" (Ioan 17:6) fiindca intrupat
a putut face acest lucru cu succes.
RENUMELE PROST AL CARNII
- Mai tarziu, sfantul Augustin spunea ca inainte de convertirea lui i-a citit si i-a studiat pe marii filozofi pagani
ai vremii dar de la nici unul nu a putut sa auda asa ceva: si anume ca Dumnezeu creatorul tuturor lucrurilor a
luat trupul unei fiinte facute de El pentru indeplinirea planului Sau mantuitor. Trebuie sa recunoastem ca este
INGENIOS! Sa ia trupul uneia dintre creaturile pe care vrea sa le salveze? Asta, misiune de salvare!
Aceasta este implinirea vremii care a venit despre care Pavel vorbeste in Gal.4:4, cand "Dumnezeu a trimis pe
Fiul Sau, nascut din femeie, nascut sub Lege, ca sa rascumpere pe cei ce erau sub Lege, pentru ca sa capatam
infierea". Atunci Dumnezeu a ales sa treaca la implinirea planului Sau de mantuire. Prima actiune din aceasta
misiune de salvare a fost intruparea Cuvantului Sau.
Aceasta este minunea si surpriza ideii si actului intruparii: ca Dumnezeu putea si devenea trup; ca Dumnezeu
intra in aceasta viata pe care noi oamenii o traim limitandu-se in timp si spatiu pentru ca ochii oamenilor sa-l
poata vedea si sa nu moara. (doar asa puteau sa-l "vada"!). Creatorul aparea in mijlocul creatiei Sale intr-un fel
in care aceasta sa-l poata vedea si cunoaste. De aceea aproape de incheierea acestei misiuni El a putut spune cu
satisfactie: "Am facut cunoscut numele Tau, oamenilor pe care Mi i-ai dat din lume" (Ioan 17:6) fiindca intrupat
a putut face acest lucru cu succes.
Tocmai pe vremea cand firea pamantesca isi facuse un renume prost, lui Dumnezeu ii vine ideea de a-l trimite
pe Fiul Sau intr-o fire asemanatoare cu cea a pacatului. Sa se supuna limitarilor ei si slabiciunilor ei.
* Intruparea a fost si mai uluitoare daca privim la cuvantul folosit de Ioan pentru a descrie intruparea sau
venirea in trup: "sarx". Acesta este cuvantul folosit de nenumarate ori de Pavel pentru a descrie "carnea" sau
"firea pamanteasca". Ideea ca Logosul a imbracat firea pamanteasca (natura umana) cu toate slabiciunile ei era
scandaloasa. A aplica aceasta idee lui Dumnezeu era ceva la care mintile lor reactionau cu oroare. Din aceasta
cauza s-a nascut in biserica grupul DOCETIST ("dokein" - a parea). In prima sa epistola Ioan se adreseaza si
mai direct acestui grup: 1 Ioan 4:1....
"Preaiubitilor sa nu dati crezare oricarui duh, ci sa cercetati duhurile daca sunt de la Dumnezeu, caci in lume au
iesit multi prorooci mincinosi. Duhul lui Dumnezeu sa-l cunoasteti dupa acesta: Orice duh care marturiseste ca
Isus Hristos a venit in trup este de la Dumnezeu si orice duh care nu marturiseste pe Isus, nu este de la
Dumnezeu, ci este duhul lui Antihrist... "
Pentru Ioan aceasta era o negare a adevarului Evangheliei. Isus a fost pe deplin Dumnezeu dar a fost si om pe
de-a intregul. A posedat natura divina dar aici vedem ca a imbracat-o si pe cea umana. E bine sa conservam
neatinsa ideea dumnezeirii lui Isus Hristos dar sa nu uitam ca el s-a facut trup, pentru a plati in locul nostru pe
cruce si a realiza mantuirea noastra! In intruparea lui Isus il vedem pe Cel Atotputernic venind in ajutorul celor
neputinciosi, traind o viata ca a lor, dar pe placul Lui, ca si noi de atunci incolo sa facem la fel.
PRIN INTRUPARE ISUS IMPLINESTE SCOPUL MANTUITOR AL LUI DUMNEZEU
Tocmai pe vremea cand firea pamantesca isi facuse un renume prost, lui Dumnezeu ii vine ideea de a-l trimite
pe Fiul Sau intr-o fire asemanatoare cu cea a pacatului. Sa se supuna limitarilor ei si slabiciunilor ei.
* Intruparea a fost si mai uluitoare daca privim la cuvantul folosit de Ioan pentru a descrie intruparea sau
venirea in trup: "sarx". Acesta este cuvantul folosit de nenumarate ori de Pavel pentru a descrie "carnea" sau
"firea pamanteasca". Ideea ca Logosul a imbracat firea pamanteasca (natura umana) cu toate slabiciunile ei era
scandaloasa. A aplica aceasta idee lui Dumnezeu era ceva la care mintile lor reactionau cu oroare. Din aceasta
cauza s-a nascut in biserica grupul DOCETIST ("dokein" - a parea). In prima sa epistola Ioan se adreseaza si
mai direct acestui grup: 1 Ioan 4:1....
"Preaiubitilor sa nu dati crezare oricarui duh, ci sa cercetati duhurile daca sunt de la Dumnezeu, caci in lume au
iesit multi prorooci mincinosi. Duhul lui Dumnezeu sa-l cunoasteti dupa acesta: Orice duh care marturiseste ca
Isus Hristos a venit in trup este de la Dumnezeu si orice duh care nu marturiseste pe Isus, nu este de la
Dumnezeu, ci este duhul lui Antihrist... "

Pentru Ioan aceasta era o negare a adevarului Evangheliei. Isus a fost pe deplin Dumnezeu dar a fost si om pe
de-a intregul. A posedat natura divina dar aici vedem ca a imbracat-o si pe cea umana. E bine sa conservam
neatinsa ideea dumnezeirii lui Isus Hristos dar sa nu uitam ca el s-a facut trup, pentru a plati in locul nostru pe
cruce si a realiza mantuirea noastra! In intruparea lui Isus il vedem pe Cel Atotputernic venind in ajutorul celor
neputinciosi, traind o viata ca a lor, dar pe placul Lui, ca si noi de atunci incolo sa facem la fel.
PRIN INTRUPARE ISUS IMPLINESTE SCOPUL MANTUITOR AL LUI DUMNEZEU
Ca prin intrupare Isus implineste scopul mantuitor al lui Dumnezeu Scriptura ne-o aminteste de mai multe ori:
* in Evrei 2:14: "Astfel dar, deoarece copiii sunt partasi sangelui si carnii, tot asa si El Insusi a fost deopotriva
partas la ele, pentru ca prin moarte sa nimiceasca pe cel ce are puterea mortii, adica pe diavolul"
Ca prin intrupare Isus implineste scopul mantuitor al lui Dumnezeu Scriptura ne-o aminteste de mai multe ori:
* Evrei 10:5 "...caci este cu neputinta ca sangele taurilor si al tapilor sa stearga pacatele. De aceea, cand El intra
in lume, El zice: "Tu n-ai voit nici jertfa, nici prinos; ci Mi-ai pregatit un trup; n-ai primit nici arderi de tot, nici
jertfe pentru pacat". Atunci am zis: "Iata-ma (in sulul cartii este scris despre Mine), vin sa fac voia Ta,
Dumnezeule!"
* 1 Ioan 4:2 "Isus Hristos a venit in trup"
* in 1 Tim.3:16 Isus este numit "cel ce-a fost aratat in trup"
Pentru a intelege mai bine in ce "s-a bagat" Isus prin intruparea Sa, sa privim la,...
LIMITARILE FIINTEI OMENESTI
"Ce este omul?" a fost intrebarea din mintea lui David, psalmistul (Ps.8). Dar sa ne intrebam si noi ce-a devenit
Isus prin a se intrupa/incarna?
Din punct de vedere biologic, omul este un mamifer vertebrat. Din ordinul primatelor. Din clasa: homo. De
specia: sapiens. Corpul sau este alcatuit din organe. tesuturi, celule si protoplasma.
"Ce este omul?" a fost intrebarea din mintea lui David, psalmistul (Ps.8). Dar sa ne intrebam si noi ce-a devenit
Isus prin a se intrupa/incarna?
Din punct de vedere biologic, omul este un mamifer vertebrat. Din ordinul primatelor. Din clasa: homo. De
specia: sapiens. Corpul sau este alcatuit din organe. tesuturi, celule si protoplasma.
Din punct de vedere chimic, omul este alcatuit in cea mai mare parte din apa, dintr-o cantitate apreciabila de
carbon, din diferite cantitati de fier, calciu, magneziu, fosfor, sulf, si saruri minerale.
Din punct de vedere chimic, omul este alcatuit in cea mai mare parte din apa, dintr-o cantitate apreciabila de
carbon, din diferite cantitati de fier, calciu, magneziu, fosfor, sulf, si saruri minerale.
Din punct de vedere psihic, are capacitati intelectuale si emotionale, vointa si diverse instincte. Poate uneori sa
alerge foarte repede si sa sfideze pentru putin forta gravitationala sarind in sus. Cu bratele poate realiza diferite
alte forme dar toate lipsite de viata. Este limitat de timp, spatiu si materie. Viata pe care o are este extrem de
fragila si este chinuit de o multime de boli. De asemenea, psihic vorbind este bantuit de o multime de probleme
si de griji care-i pot rapi somnul sau il pot face ineficient. Are vise si aspiratii, din care foarte putine si rareori se
implinesc in timpul scurtei sale existente. Acesta este, pe scurt omul.
Acum sa ne gandim ca toate acestea au devenit parte a fiintei Domnului Isus Hristos. Destul de socant, da? Ce
ne spun acestea despre EL?
* Noi avem un Mantuitor care a trait ce traim noi, a suferit ce suferim noi, a plans pentru ceea ce noi plangem, a
mancat ce mancam si noi, care a trait ca un om in adevaratul sens al cuvantului! De aceea, venind la El atunci
cand gresim nu reactioneaza scarbit si dezgustat de ceea ce noi am facut. Nu poate fi luat prin surprindere de
prostiile nostre si nu raspunde iritat. Cand el a fost taiat, a sangerat, cand a fost trist a plans, cand i-a fost foame
stomacul l-a durut, cand i-a fost frig a tremurat, cand inima I s-a oprit a murit.
Fiindca a fost om, a simtit slabiciunea noastra, dar fara a ceda pacatului. A rezistat dezlantuirii ispitei impotriva
Lui. Din punct de vedere psihic, are capacitati intelectuale si emotionale, vointa si diverse instincte. Poate
uneori sa alerge foarte repede si sa sfideze pentru putin forta gravitationala sarind in sus. Cu bratele poate
realiza diferite alte forme dar toate lipsite de viata. Este limitat de timp, spatiu si materie. Viata pe care o are
este extrem de fragila si este chinuit de o multime de boli. De asemenea, psihic vorbind este bantuit de o
multime de probleme si de griji care-i pot rapi somnul sau il pot face ineficient. Are vise si aspiratii, din care
foarte putine si rareori se implinesc in timpul scurtei sale existente. Acesta este, pe scurt omul.
Acum sa ne gandim ca toate acestea au devenit parte a fiintei Domnului Isus Hristos. Destul de socant, da? Ce
ne spun acestea despre EL?

* Noi avem un Mantuitor care a trait ce traim noi, a suferit ce suferim noi, a plans pentru ceea ce noi plangem, a
mancat ce mancam si noi, care a trait ca un om in adevaratul sens al cuvantului! De aceea, venind la El atunci
cand gresim nu reactioneaza scarbit si dezgustat de ceea ce noi am facut. Nu poate fi luat prin surprindere de
prostiile nostre si nu raspunde iritat. Cand el a fost taiat, a sangerat, cand a fost trist a plans, cand i-a fost foame
stomacul l-a durut, cand i-a fost frig a tremurat, cand inima I s-a oprit a murit.
Fiindca a fost om, a simtit slabiciunea noastra, dar fara a ceda pacatului. A rezistat dezlantuirii ispitei impotriva
Lui.
DE CE S-A INTRUPAT HRISTOS? CE VREA DUMNEZEU PRIN INTRUPAREA LUI?
EX. ILUSTRATIA "soldatului de plumb" a lui C.S.Lewis din cartea lui "Crestinismul redus la esente", pag.124126. Splendida ilustratie!
("La creatie Domnul l-a facut pe om asemenea Lui. La intrupare, El s-a facut asemenea omului" (John Boys)
Putem spune in continuare, pentru ca omul sa fie facut spiritual ca El. Asemenea lui. Sa fie facut partas al firii
dumnezeiesti (Vezi 2 Petru 1:4). Si,
*- pentru ca viata lui Dumnezeu sa fie in noi. ("La creatie Domnul l-a facut pe om asemenea Lui. La intrupare,
El s-a facut asemenea omului" (John Boys) Putem spune in continuare, pentru ca omul sa fie facut spiritual ca
El. Asemenea lui. Sa fie facut partas al firii dumnezeiesti (Vezi 2 Petru 1:4). Si,
*- pentru ca Dumnezeu sa traiasca prin noi, nestanjenit. (ptr. a muri trupeste, a invia trupeste!)
CITATE:
*- pentru ca Dumnezeu sa traiasca prin noi, nestanjenit. (ptr. a muri trupeste, a invia trupeste!)
CITATE:
"Fiindca Hristos este om, el poate ispasi pentru el si poate simti impreuna cu el. Fiindca Hristos este Dumnezeu
ispasirea savarsita de El are valoare absoluta iar unirea omului cu Dumnezeu pe care astfel o realizeaza este
desavarsita" (John Blanchard ?)
"El a luat chipul unui rob in timp ce a pastrat chipul lui Dumnezeu (in Filip.2, nu se spune ca a renuntat la
acesta). Este exact ceea ce face posibila mantuirea noastra si o realizeaza" (William Hendricksen)
MIRACOLUL INCARNARII
"Fiindca Hristos este om, el poate ispasi pentru el si poate simti impreuna cu el. Fiindca Hristos este Dumnezeu
ispasirea savarsita de El are valoare absoluta iar unirea omului cu Dumnezeu pe care astfel o realizeaza este
desavarsita" (John Blanchard ?)
"El a luat chipul unui rob in timp ce a pastrat chipul lui Dumnezeu (in Filip.2, nu se spune ca a renuntat la
acesta). Este exact ceea ce face posibila mantuirea noastra si o realizeaza" (William Hendricksen)
MIRACOLUL INCARNARII
Incarnarea este cea ce C.S.Lewis numeste "Marele Miracol" al Crestinismului. Este capitolul central al dramei
mantuirii. Iata cum il descrie el:
"Povestea incarnarii este o poveste a coborarii si a inaltarii...Ma gandesc la aceasta intreaga idee a coborarii jos,
jos de tot apoi a inaltarii sus, sus de tot. Ma gandesc la coborarea nu doar la umanitate ci la acele noua luni care
preced nasterea umana...si apoi la coborarea si mai jos in moartea trupului. Cineva se poate gandi la imaginea
unui scufundator, care se dezbraca de haina dupa haina, dezgolindu-se, apoi pentru o clipa zvacnind in aer
urmand plonjonul prin apa verzuie, calda si luminata de razele soarelui pana la apa rece si intunecata din adanc,
la noroiul si mizeria de pe fundul marii, dar urcand din nou, cu plamanii goliti de aer la apa calda si luminoasa
ajungand in cele din urma in stralucirea soarelui si tinand triumfator in mana lucrul pentru care a sarit in apa.
Acest lucru este natura umana, insa pe langa acesta si intreaga creatie, noul univers".
SEMNIFICATIA INTRUPARII (Charles R.Swindoll)
Incarnarea este cea ce C.S.Lewis numeste "Marele Miracol" al Crestinismului. Este capitolul central al dramei
mantuirii. Iata cum il descrie el:
"Povestea incarnarii este o poveste a coborarii si a inaltarii...Ma gandesc la aceasta intreaga idee a coborarii jos,
jos de tot apoi a inaltarii sus, sus de tot. Ma gandesc la coborarea nu doar la umanitate ci la acele noua luni care
preced nasterea umana...si apoi la coborarea si mai jos in moartea trupului. Cineva se poate gandi la imaginea
unui scufundator, care se dezbraca de haina dupa haina, dezgolindu-se, apoi pentru o clipa zvacnind in aer
urmand plonjonul prin apa verzuie, calda si luminata de razele soarelui pana la apa rece si intunecata din adanc,
la noroiul si mizeria de pe fundul marii, dar urcand din nou, cu plamanii goliti de aer la apa calda si luminoasa

ajungand in cele din urma in stralucirea soarelui si tinand triumfator in mana lucrul pentru care a sarit in apa.
Acest lucru este natura umana, insa pe langa acesta si intreaga creatie, noul univers".
SEMNIFICATIA INTRUPARII (Charles R.Swindoll)
"Plonjonul" in umanitate prin intrupare ne sugereaza rascumpararea. Coborarea unui Dumnezeu sfant, singurul
Dumnezeu adevarat la conditia unor fiinte instrainate de el si dusmanoase Lui. Inseamna recuperarea naturii
umane ce a cazut in degradarea pacatului. Inseamna in cei mai simpli termeni, uniunea dintre Dumnezeu si
umanitate in persoana lui Isus Hristos. Uniunea aceasta a avut loc in clipa zamislirii din fecioara cand cele doua
naturi s-au intalnit miraculos, devenind inseparabile dar totusi neamestecate (vezi Luca 1:31-35). In aceasta
unire misterioasa, o dumnezeire nestirbita s-a investmantat intr-o umanitate pura. Coegal, coetern si coexistent
impreuna cu Tatal, Isus era cu desavarsire Dumnezeu si cu desavarsire om! La intrupare, Dumnezeu a "plonjat"
in intunericul in care zacea creatia Lui si a devenit un om. (pentru a-l reface pe om sa fie om).
"Plonjonul" in umanitate prin intrupare ne sugereaza rascumpararea. Coborarea unui Dumnezeu sfant, singurul
Dumnezeu adevarat la conditia unor fiinte instrainate de el si dusmanoase Lui. Inseamna recuperarea naturii
umane ce a cazut in degradarea pacatului. Inseamna in cei mai simpli termeni, uniunea dintre Dumnezeu si
umanitate in persoana lui Isus Hristos. Uniunea aceasta a avut loc in clipa zamislirii din fecioara cand cele doua
naturi s-au intalnit miraculos, devenind inseparabile dar totusi neamestecate (vezi Luca 1:31-35). In aceasta
unire misterioasa, o dumnezeire nestirbita s-a investmantat intr-o umanitate pura. Coegal, coetern si coexistent
impreuna cu Tatal, Isus era cu desavarsire Dumnezeu si cu desavarsire om! La intrupare, Dumnezeu a "plonjat"
in intunericul in care zacea creatia Lui si a devenit un om. (pentru a-l reface pe om sa fie om).
"La inceput era Cuvantul si Cuvantul era cu Dumnezeu si Cuvantul era Dumnezeu...Si Cuvantul s-a facut trup si
a locuit printre noi, plin de har si de adevar. Si noi am privit slava lui, o slava intocmai ca slava singurului
nascut din Tatal" (Ioan 1:1, 14)
"La inceput era Cuvantul si Cuvantul era cu Dumnezeu si Cuvantul era Dumnezeu...Si Cuvantul s-a facut trup si
a locuit printre noi, plin de har si de adevar. Si noi am privit slava lui, o slava intocmai ca slava singurului
nascut din Tatal" (Ioan 1:1, 14)
MANUALUL SALVATORULUI?!
Despre noi, oamenii, de exemplu ecologistii spun ca putem fi salvatorii altor specii. Dar...
Noi, "salvatorii" altor specii? Noi, care nu ne putem salva pe noi insine? Daca ar fi sa se scrie o carte,
"Manualul Salvatorului" cred ca principiul de baza ar trebui sa fie, pentru a salva trebuie sa devii ceea ce vrei sa
salvezi. De aceea, salvatorii mineri cred ca sunt cei mai aproape de adevar. Ca sa salveze mineri, ei insisi
trebuie sa fie mineri. Si inca dintre cei mai buni. Sa intre in mina si sa o cunoasca bine!
Noi, "salvatorii" altor specii? Noi, care nu ne putem salva pe noi insine? Daca ar fi sa se scrie o carte,
"Manualul Salvatorului" cred ca principiul de baza ar trebui sa fie, pentru a salva trebuie sa devii ceea ce vrei sa
salvezi. De aceea, salvatorii mineri cred ca sunt cei mai aproape de adevar. Ca sa salveze mineri, ei insisi
trebuie sa fie mineri. Si inca dintre cei mai buni. Sa intre in mina si sa o cunoasca bine!
De ce ecologistii care vor sa salveze, de exemplu, o specie de broaste pe cale de disparitie nu pot sa o faca? In
primul rand, nu devin broaste si nu cred ca le-ar place sa devina!
De ce ecologistii care vor sa salveze, de exemplu, o specie de broaste pe cale de disparitie nu pot sa o faca? In
primul rand, nu devin broaste si nu cred ca le-ar place sa devina!
O DOCTRINA APLICABILA Doctrina intruparii lui Dumnezeu in persoana lui Isus din Nazaret nu este o
doctrina moarta, care nu se poate aplica. Doctrina uniunii celor doua naturi, umana si divina in incarnarea lui
Isus nu inseamna oare ca: ?
Fiindca este Dumnezeu, el are dreptul si poate ierta pacatele (Marcu 2:7).
O DOCTRINA APLICABILA Doctrina intruparii lui Dumnezeu in persoana lui Isus din Nazaret nu este o
doctrina moarta, care nu se poate aplica. Doctrina uniunii celor doua naturi, umana si divina in incarnarea lui
Isus nu inseamna oare ca: ?
Fiindca este Dumnezeu, el are dreptul si poate ierta pacatele (Marcu 2:7).
Fiindca este om, poate intelege slabiciunile omenesti si poate ajuta (Evrei 2:17; 4:15)
Fiindca este si Dumnezeu si Om, este singurul mijlocitor adecvat intre Dumnezeu si om (Gal.3:20; 1 Tim.2:5)
De aceea, Lui sa-i cerem iertare.
El e Dumnezeu. Lui sa-i cerem ajutor; a trait ca om, intelege si ne poate ajuta.
Sa venim la El, ca om doar El ne aduce in prezenta lui Dumnezeu!

CONCLUZIE: Trupurile noastre din instrumente, unelte ale pacatului, devin trupuri ale vietii!
De aceea, amintiti-va de exclamatia de disperare a lui Pavel, din Romani 7: 24, "O nenorocitul de mine cine ma
va salva din acest trup de moarte?" Pavel se vede condamnat de lege si de pacatosenia lui. Fara speranta si fara
sansa. Insa in intruparea lui Isus vedem raspunsul la marea deznadejde a lui Pavel. Intr-un trup ca al lui (Pavel),
Isus a condamnat moartea si a distrus puterea pacatului. Acest trup poate acum deveni un trup al vietii, fiindca
Isus a venit in trup.
OPERA CAMELOT
De aceea, amintiti-va de exclamatia de disperare a lui Pavel, din Romani 7: 24, "O nenorocitul de mine cine ma
va salva din acest trup de moarte?" Pavel se vede condamnat de lege si de pacatosenia lui. Fara speranta si fara
sansa. Insa in intruparea lui Isus vedem raspunsul la marea deznadejde a lui Pavel. Intr-un trup ca al lui (Pavel),
Isus a condamnat moartea si a distrus puterea pacatului. Acest trup poate acum deveni un trup al vietii, fiindca
Isus a venit in trup.
In piesa de opera Camelot, regele Arthur descopera infidelitatea reginei Guinevere cu Lancelot, cel mai de
incredere cavaler al regelui. Dupa lege ea era considerata vinovata si condamnata la arderea pe rug. Regele
Arthur se vede prins intre dragostea lui pentru regina lui si responsabilitatea lui fata de lege. Mordred, fiul
nelegitim al regelui, da glas situatiei disperate in care se afla regele.
"Arthur, ce dilema magnifica! Las-o sa moara si se va termina cu tine! Daca vrei insa, las-o sa traiasca si vei fi
un nelegiuit! Ce vei face, Arthure? O vei ucide pe regina sau ucizi legea?"
Cu lacrimi in ochi, Regele Arthur apare la fereastra castelului pentru a urmari executia. Calaul asteapta semnul
din partea regelui pentru a aprinde rugul pe care se afla regina lui. In durerea lui, insa acesta intarzie.
"Nu pot! Nu pot! NU pot sa o las sa moara!" La care Mordred, dispretuitor ii raspunde: "Esti om la urma urmei,
nu? Slab si neputincios!"
Spre deosebire de Regele Arthur, Isus nu este "slab si neputincios". El este om dar este si Dumnezeu. El isi lasa
regatul Sau ceresc cum ne spune Filipeni 2:5-7, ia chipul unui om si moare in locul nostru, cei condamnati de
lege pentru infidelitate la arderea pe rug. El este acel Rege care a avut puterea renuntarii la toate onorurile si
placerile unui rege si sa ia locul miresei Sale (2 Cor.8:9). Facand aceasta, El a satisfacut atat cerinta legii
necrutatoare cat si a dragostei divine! Si nu s-a oprit aici. Dupa cea platit in locul reginei Sale, a inviat si ii
pregateste un loc mai frumos unde intr-o buna zi, o va duce!
APLICA!
In piesa de opera Camelot, regele Arthur descopera infidelitatea reginei Guinevere cu Lancelot, cel mai de
incredere cavaler al regelui. Dupa lege ea era considerata vinovata si condamnata la arderea pe rug. Regele
Arthur se vede prins intre dragostea lui pentru regina lui si responsabilitatea lui fata de lege. Mordred, fiul
nelegitim al regelui, da glas situatiei disperate in care se afla regele.
"Arthur, ce dilema magnifica! Las-o sa moara si se va termina cu tine! Daca vrei insa, las-o sa traiasca si vei fi
un nelegiuit! Ce vei face, Arthure? O vei ucide pe regina sau ucizi legea?"
Cu lacrimi in ochi, Regele Arthur apare la fereastra castelului pentru a urmari executia. Calaul asteapta semnul
din partea regelui pentru a aprinde rugul pe care se afla regina lui. In durerea lui, insa acesta intarzie.
"Nu pot! Nu pot! NU pot sa o las sa moara!" La care Mordred, dispretuitor ii raspunde: "Esti om la urma urmei,
nu? Slab si neputincios!"
Spre deosebire de Regele Arthur, Isus nu este "slab si neputincios". El este om dar este si Dumnezeu. El isi lasa
regatul Sau ceresc cum ne spune Filipeni 2:5-7, ia chipul unui om si moare in locul nostru, cei condamnati de
lege pentru infidelitate la arderea pe rug. El este acel Rege care a avut puterea renuntarii la toate onorurile si
placerile unui rege si sa ia locul miresei Sale (2 Cor.8:9). Facand aceasta, El a satisfacut atat cerinta legii
necrutatoare cat si a dragostei divine! Si nu s-a oprit aici. Dupa cea platit in locul reginei Sale, a inviat si ii
pregateste un loc mai frumos unde intr-o buna zi, o va duce!
Imagineaza-te pe tine insuti in locul acelei infidele tradatoare. Si suntem. Ne-am tradat menirea noastra de fiinte
facute dupa chipul si asemanarea Lui pentru a fi ai Lui. L-am parasit si am trait dupa placerea noastra. Legea lui
ne-a ajuns din urma si acum ne vedem condamnati de ea. Ne aflam la stalpul infamiei inaintea unui intreg
univers care ne priveste cu dispret. Ne meritam pedeapsa si totul atarna de un gest! Dar culmea, cel de la care se
asteapta gestul aprobator al executiei noastre, se coboara din Palatul lui si se pune in locul nostru platind pentru
pacatele altora! Ce altceva ai putea face la acest gest decat sa cazi la pamant si sa-l numesti Domnul si
Mantuitorul tau?

SCENA INTRUPARII
Imagineaza-te pe tine insuti in locul acelei infidele tradatoare. Si suntem. Ne-am tradat menirea noastra de fiinte
facute dupa chipul si asemanarea Lui pentru a fi ai Lui. L-am parasit si am trait dupa placerea noastra. Legea lui
ne-a ajuns din urma si acum ne vedem condamnati de ea. Ne aflam la stalpul infamiei inaintea unui intreg
univers care ne priveste cu dispret. Ne meritam pedeapsa si totul atarna de un gest! Dar culmea, cel de la care se
asteapta gestul aprobator al executiei noastre, se coboara din Palatul lui si se pune in locul nostru platind pentru
pacatele altora! Ce altceva ai putea face la acest gest decat sa cazi la pamant si sa-l numesti Domnul si
Mantuitorul tau?
SCENA INTRUPARII
Cea mai frumoasa si miscatoare scena a intruparii o avem in Filipeni 2:5-7:
Cea mai frumoasa si miscatoare scena a intruparii o avem in Filipeni 2:5-7:
ISUS A FACUT 7 PASI IN JOS...
* Aici umilinta divina licareste in lumina supusa a intruparii, invaluita in umbrele unei alte lumi. Creatorul s-a
supus de bunavoie legilor Universului pe care tocmai El l-a creat. A renuntat la independenta si a devenit
dependent. A renuntat sa mai fie cel caruia I se slujea pentru a deveni cel ce slujea.
Ca si Dumnezeu,
Golindu-se de Sine Insusi, Fiul nu si-a pierdut divinitatea. Devenind un om, nu a ajuns sa fie mai mic/putin
decat Dumnezeu. In schimb in mod voluntar a renuntat la atuurile divinitatii Sale si puterea de Dumnezeu
pentru a deveni om.
Ca si Om,
Golindu-se de Sine Insusi, Fiul nu si-a pierdut divinitatea. Devenind un om, nu a ajuns sa fie mai mic/putin
decat Dumnezeu. In schimb in mod voluntar a renuntat la atuurile divinitatii Sale si puterea de Dumnezeu
pentru a deveni om.
Ca si Om,
Desi a trait pe deplin intreaga experienta umana, Isus era incapabil sa faca vreo doua lucruri, fiindca era si
Dumnezeu: sa-l asculte pe Satana si sa pacatuiasca. Atunci Evrei 4:14-16 ne arata ce fel de relatie ar trebui sa
avem cu Isus (APLICATIE! "Sa ne apropiem" ! Evrei 4:14-16)
BENEFICIILE PRACTICE ALE INTRUPARII LOGOSULUI
Desi a trait pe deplin intreaga experienta umana, Isus era incapabil sa faca vreo doua lucruri, fiindca era si
Dumnezeu: sa-l asculte pe Satana si sa pacatuiasca. Atunci Evrei 4:14-16 ne arata ce fel de relatie ar trebui sa
avem cu Isus (APLICATIE! "Sa ne apropiem" ! Evrei 4:14-16)
Intruparea Logosului, din nou, nu este o doctrina care sa ramana in sferele inalte ale gandirii teologice. Ea s-a
realizat cu un scop practic precis.
* "Carnea" sau "firea pamanteasca" fac aluzie la slabiciunea omeneasca. Si despre Isus se spune in 2 Cor.13:4
ca "a fost rastignit prin slabiciune" si ca a fost "omorat in trup"
Intruparea Logosului, din nou, nu este o doctrina care sa ramana in sferele inalte ale gandirii teologice. Ea s-a
realizat cu un scop practic precis.
(1 Petru 3:18), pentru a ne aduce la Dumnezeu.
* Prin intruparea lui Isus, Dumnezeu osandea pacatul (Rom.8:3...) in chiar resedinta de care el de folosea: il
osandea in firea pamanteasca, pentru ca astfel ceva minunat si irealizabil altfel sa fie acum posibil pentru noi:
porunca Legii incalcata de noi in firea pamanteasca sa fie acum IMPLINITA DE NOI. Cum? Prezenti inca in
firea pamanteasca, dar conducandu-ne dupa alte principii de viata! Alte "instincte"! Cele ale Duhului Sfant!
(vezi, referinta).
* Prin intruparea lui Isus, Dumnezeu osandea pacatul (Rom.8:3...) in chiar resedinta de care el de folosea: il
osandea in firea pamanteasca, pentru ca astfel ceva minunat si irealizabil altfel sa fie acum posibil pentru noi:
porunca Legii incalcata de noi in firea pamanteasca sa fie acum IMPLINITA DE NOI. Cum? Prezenti inca in
firea pamanteasca, dar conducandu-ne dupa alte principii de viata! Alte "instincte"! Cele ale Duhului Sfant!
(vezi, referinta).
* In trup El a fost facut pacat pentru noi (2 Cor.5:21) pentru ca noi sa fim (incredibil! noi?) NEPRIHANIREA
LUI DUMNEZEU IN EL. Si asta in timp ce suntem inca in trup!
* Si iata inca o idee care ar fi mult pe placul lui Ioan: 2 Cor.13:4: "Intr-adevar, El a fost rastignit prin slabiciune,
dar traieste prin puterea lui Dumnezeu. Tot astfel si noi, suntem slabi in El (din cauza carnii noastre), dar, prin

puterea lui Dumnezeu, vom fi plini de viata cu El fata de voi." Cu El, noi putem fi plini de viata!
CONCLUZIA:
* Si iata inca o idee care ar fi mult pe placul lui Ioan: 2 Cor.13:4: "Intr-adevar, El a fost rastignit prin slabiciune,
dar traieste prin puterea lui Dumnezeu. Tot astfel si noi, suntem slabi in El (din cauza carnii noastre), dar, prin
puterea lui Dumnezeu, vom fi plini de viata cu El fata de voi." Cu El, noi putem fi plini de viata!
Deci, El s-a intrupat pentru ca:
1. Ca sa ne aduca la Dumnezeu.
2. Sa osandeasca pacatul in firea pamanteasca.
3. Porunca Legii lui Dumnezeu sa fie implinita in noi.
4. Ca noi sa fim neprihanirea lui Dumnezeu in El.
5. Pentru a fi plini de viata cu El.
In Isus, viata lui Dumnezeu s-a revarsat din abundenta asupra tuturor celor ce cred. De aceea, Isus s-a intrupat,
ne spune teologia NT. Ce nebuneste sa nu profitam de aceste beneficii !!
Tot ceea ce am facut pana acum a fost sa studiem prima parte a versetului 14: "Si Cuvantul s-a facut trup". Nam vazut ce insemna, "a locuit printre noi", "plin de har si de adevar", "Si noi am privit (1 Ioan 1!) slava Lui
(vezi Exod, Moise), o slava intocmai ca slava singurului nascut din Tatal".
"a locuit printre noi" - si la propriu si la figurat! Vecin cu ei si om ca ei. Ce ziceti daca il aveti pe Dumnezeu,
vecin de palier. Sta la ap.25?! E aproape? Da! Ei bine asta vrea sa spuna. Ca prin intrupare Dumnezeul cel
Vesnic s-a apropiat de noi.
Mai exact cuvantul este "si-a facut cortul", "a tabarat". Cortul din pustie al iudeilor era o umbra a realitatilor lui
Dumnezeu. O reprezentare materiala a marelui adevar al incarnarii
"Si noi am privit slava Lui, o slava intocmai ca slava singurului nascut din Tatal"
5. Pentru a fi plini de viata cu El.
In Isus, viata lui Dumnezeu s-a revarsat din abundenta asupra tuturor celor ce cred. De aceea, Isus s-a intrupat,
ne spune teologia NT. Ce nebuneste sa nu profitam de aceste beneficii !! Tot ceea ce am facut pana acum a fost
sa studiem prima parte a versetului 14: "Si Cuvantul s-a facut trup". N-am vazut ce insemna, "a locuit printre
noi", "plin de har si de adevar", "Si noi am privit (1 Ioan 1!) slava Lui (vezi Exod, Moise), o slava intocmai ca
slava singurului nascut din Tatal".
"a locuit printre noi" - si la propriu si la figurat! Vecin cu ei si om ca ei. Ce ziceti daca il aveti pe Dumnezeu,
vecin de palier. Sta la ap.25?! E aproape? Da! Ei bine asta vrea sa spuna. Ca prin intrupare Dumnezeul cel
Vesnic s-a apropiat de noi.
Mai exact cuvantul este "si-a facut cortul", "a tabarat". Cortul din pustie al iudeilor era o umbra a realitatilor lui
Dumnezeu. O reprezentare materiala a marelui adevar al incarnarii
"Si noi am privit slava Lui, o slava intocmai ca slava singurului nascut din Tatal"
Divinul Fiu s-a facut carne. Cel Atotputernic s-a arata pe pamant sub chipul unui neajutorat copil al unor
oameni (ganditi-va la aceasta!: ca a trebuit hranit! Nu putea sa se hraneasca singur, trebuia schimbat de haine,
nu putea singur, trebuia ajutat sa umble, nu putea sa o faca singur, etc. E socant! Prin contrast putem intelege de
ce Dumnezeu s-a coborat atat de mult: pentru ca sa ne inalte pe noi nespus de mult!
"Si noi am privit slava Lui"
Divinul Fiu s-a facut carne. Cel Atotputernic s-a arata pe pamant sub chipul unui neajutorat copil al unor
oameni (ganditi-va la aceasta!: ca a trebuit hranit! Nu putea sa se hraneasca singur, trebuia schimbat de haine,
nu putea singur, trebuia ajutat sa umble, nu putea sa o faca singur, etc. E socant! Prin contrast putem intelege de
ce Dumnezeu s-a coborat atat de mult: pentru ca sa ne inalte pe noi nespus de mult!
"Si noi am privit slava Lui"
Cum? Sa vada slava lui Dumnezeu? Cum? Aceasi slava care era a Celui ce I s-a aratat lui Moise pe munte I se
arata si lui Ioan. Dar de data aceasta invaluita/investmantat intr-un trup parca pentru a-i proteja pe oameni de
expunerea la ucigatoarea revelare a slavei lui Dumnezeu, dar minunea minunilor, aratandu-le oamenilor toata
aceasta slava, odata ce-l privesc pe Isus Hristos.
Cum? Sa vada slava lui Dumnezeu? Cum? Aceasi slava care era a Celui ce I s-a aratat lui Moise pe munte I se
arata si lui Ioan. Dar de data aceasta invaluita/investmantat intr-un trup parca pentru a-i proteja pe oameni de
expunerea la ucigatoarea revelare a slavei lui Dumnezeu, dar minunea minunilor, aratandu-le oamenilor toata
aceasta slava, odata ce-l privesc pe Isus Hristos.

In VT aceasta slava se arata cateodata. (Ex.16:10; 24:16; 40:34; 1 Regi 8:11). O slava ce nu se putea privi cu
ochiul liber de muritori. Era doar uneori vizibila. Insa in Hristos aceasta ramane cu noi. Ioan 17:22 "Eu le-am
dat slava, pe care Mi-ai dat-o Tu, pentru ca ei sa fie una cum si noi suntem una".
Ioan ne spune ca a vazut acea slava in trupul unui om. Al Omului Isus! Slava aceasta, infasurata in invelitoarea
vie a trupului lui Isus Hristos.
Nu este aceasta marturia apostolilor? Vezi 2 Petru 1:16, 1 Ioan 1:1; 4:14 ("vazut" cuvant cheie), cu referire
directa la Transfigurare.
In VT aceasta slava se arata cateodata. (Ex.16:10; 24:16; 40:34; 1 Regi 8:11). O slava ce nu se putea privi cu
ochiul liber de muritori. Era doar uneori vizibila. Insa in Hristos aceasta ramane cu noi. Ioan 17:22 "Eu le-am
dat slava, pe care Mi-ai dat-o Tu, pentru ca ei sa fie una cum si noi suntem una".
Ioan ne spune ca a vazut acea slava in trupul unui om. Al Omului Isus! Slava aceasta, infasurata in invelitoarea
vie a trupului lui Isus Hristos.
Nu este aceasta marturia apostolilor? Vezi 2 Petru 1:16, 1 Ioan 1:1; 4:14 ("vazut" cuvant cheie), cu referire
directa la Transfigurare.
Antinomian Antics
Sabotaging the Matrix By Illuminatus Maximus
Eighteen hundred years ago, the Christian religion was in a state of chaotic upheaval. The Bible hadn Eighteen
hundred years ago, the Christian religion was in a state of chaotic upheaval. The Bible hadnt been canonised
yet, most important doctrinal issues were still up for grabs, and nobody could agree on what Jesus message
actually was. One of the most exotic flavours in this seething cauldron of theological controversy was
Gnosticism, a mystical philosophy whose adherents rejected the creator god of the Old Testament as an
incompetent fraud. Instead the Gnostic Christians dedicated their lives to the search for another god, an elusive
deity secretly hidden within the human spirit. This quest for the God within took many forms. Some Gnostics
advocated a total rejection of the world and society, living in the desert as ascetic monks; others married,
worked and played alongside their neighbours without ever discussing their spiritual pursuits.
The Gnostics had an intuitive, personal approach to enlightenment. There was no hierarchy, no code of conduct
and no central governing authority; the goal was liberation by any means necessary, not the creation of new
orthodoxies.
Misunderstood Mystics
While most Gnostic Christians contented themselves with respectable lives of study and contemplation, others
chose a more direct route. Often mischaracterised as libertines or devil-worshippers, it is the taboosmashing travelers of this shorter path who have inspired the most curiosity among modern researchers.
Taboo and Transgression
Perhaps no two human activities are as thickly ringed round with religious and social taboos as the twin
mysteries of sex and death the beginning and the end, the void from which human life emerges and the gulf
into which it disappears.
French philosopher Georges Bataille argues the religious impulse is identical to erotic desire for this reason
both strive for the extinction of individual consciousness, either through the mystical death of the ego
(religion) or the little death of the orgasm (sex).
In Batailles view, sexual and religious taboos provoke their own violation or transgression simply by
existing, for it is only through the very human drive to define and then deflower (or desecrate) states of purity
that we loosen the grip of rational utility and plunge or collapse into ecstatic communion with the sacred.
Taboo-breaking, in other words, is a profoundly spiritual activity; whether through religion (the giddy euphoria
of the blood sacrifice), sex (the anarchic carnality of the orgy) or social play (the topsy-turvy lawlessness of the
carnival). Madmen, criminals and holy fools throughout the ages have always sought to tempt fate and break
on through to the other side.
Antinomian Antics
The notion that the psychological shock caused by performing forbidden activities can lead to spiritual
awakening is called antinomianism. The word antinomian means, literally, against the law.

Antinomian sects have been present throughout human history in almost every culture. Perhaps the best-known
modern example is that of the Aghora (or pure ones), Hindu holy men who practice necrophilia, cannibalism
and even coprophagy (the eating of feces) in their fierce quest for wisdom.1
Of course, from the Aghoras point of view, eating feces is simply God eating God. If everything is God,
then why would he discriminate between sights, smells and tastes or prefer certain experiences, substances or
actions? But perhaps he would, for like many antinomian cults, the Aghora often speak in code. The practitioner
who tells us that he eats his own feces may be speaking metaphorically of his meditative practice. Without
experiencing his path for ourselves, we simply cannot know. As the above example should make abundantly
clear, the antinomian path isnt for the casually curious, nor should it be confused with mere hedonism. It
demands absolute discretion, a disdain for disapproval, and an unshakeable commitment to an ethic literally not
of this world.
Beyond Good and Evil
Antinomian mystics have never been concerned with social status, physical comfort or moral redemption.
Instead, their goal has always been the acquisition of divine power through mystical merger with the godhead.
What society calls evil is what violates boundaries and overflows without limit, blurring the categories
between pure and impure, sacred and profane. The antinomian heroine deliberately ignores these distinctions,
performing acts that most people would see as dirty, disgusting or dangerous. Trespassing on divine territory,
she frees herself from societys taboos, dissolving shame, fear and judgment as she opens herself up to the
absolute. With every forbidden act, the soul is enlarged and strengthened, made more able to receive and
integrate the divine power unleashed thereby.
Antinomianism in Primitive Christianity
The antinomian current in Gnostic Christianity came in two flavours, weak and strong. The weak antinomian
ideal held that since the flesh was just a temporary vehicle for the spirit, mature Christians could do whatever
they pleased with their bodies. Biblical rules governing diet, behaviour, dress, sex, etc., were restrictive and
unnecessary distractions intended for the mundane herd, not the spiritual elite. The strong antinomian ideal
was embraced by those Christian groups we would today call Short Path. Preaching depravity as a positive
value, these urged believers to sin without restraint. Sex, fear and intoxicants were used to break down taboos
and social conditioning, releasing tremendous amounts of magical energy while sanctifying the vilest deeds
with a mysterious grace.
The Deep Things of Satan
The most infamous Gnostic antinomian of all was Carpocrates, a second-century teacher from the Egyptian city
of Alexandria whose students prided themselves on their knowledge of the deep things of Satan. According to
St. Irenaeus, what made Carpocrates teachings so especially blasphemous was the idea Christians had to bribe
the Devil in order to return to God. The Devil would guide the souls of dead through the afterworld, but only if
they had already paid him in life through the ritualistic performance of a multitude of sins.
The Jesus Jail Break
Carpocrates taught that the Earth was a prison planet created by rebellious angels who had imprisoned human
souls here in shadowy tombs of flesh and bone. These angels were the Rulers, botched copies of another,
higher deity called the unborn god.
Jesus was a normal human being until he remembered his previous existence as a bodiless soul with the
unborn god outside space and time. As Jesus grew in knowledge and spiritual clarity, he realised that laws and
institutions (the 10 Commandments, for example) had been designed by the world-building Rulers to ensnare
and mislead us. The best way to get over sins was to just give into them. Like water seeking its own level, the
soul could then return to the unborn god, unencumbered by earthly limits and restrictions.
To the Carpocratians, Jesus was a model of someone who had achieved total freedom of the soul and since
the source of Jesus power lay in His utter contempt for the angels created universe, anyone could become
greater than Jesus by despising things below even more than He had. For this reason, some Carpocratians
considered themselves equal to Jesus Himself, while others considered themselves even more powerful.
The Carpocratians incorporated secret handshakes, dream interpretation, magic spells and other occult rites
into Christian worship. Having defeated and risen above the creators and rulers of the world, the accomplished
Carpocratian could now command these same entities, ruling over the invisible forces of creation much as they
themselves ruled over the Earth. Moral prohibitions and taboos seemed to provoke rather than inhibit the

Carpocratians. As heresy-hunter St. Irenaeus explained: [The Carpocratians] have reached such a pitch of
madness that they say that it is in their power to do whatever is irreligious and impious, for they say that actions
are good and bad only in accordance with human opinion. In the transmigrations into bodies, souls ought to
experience every kind of life and action... so that... their souls... may not, when they depart, still suffer any lack.
They must act in such a way that they will not be forced into another body if something is still lacking in their
freedom. The purpose of human life, in this view, was not to obey the rules set down by the fallen angels who
built the world and stranded us here, but to achieve enlightenment and escape the sphere of illusion altogether.
Laws were a sort of spiritual obstacle, designed to keep us motivated by pain and pleasure. It was this
misguided tendency to construct reality in terms of opposites (for example, right and wrong, good and evil,
reward and punishment) that kept us trapped here in the cycle of death and rebirth.
Jesus revealed how to escape from the cycle of reincarnation in the following parable:
When you are with your adversary on the way, act so that you may be freed from him, lest he deliver you to the
judge and the judge to the officer and he cast you into prison; truly I say to you, you will not come out from
there until you pay the last quadrant.4
This adversary was the Devil, the leader of the world-creating Rulers. After death, the Devil handed the
souls of the ignorant and inexperienced over to the judge and then to the officer; these angelic bureaucrats
recycled unprepared souls by trapping them in new bodies and sending them back to the Earth to live again. The
body was a prison.
You will not come out from there until you pay the last quadrant, meant that no one escaped from the
Rulers who created the Earth; souls are always returned here until they have completed all sins. The soul
which had completed all sins in one lifetime was freed from the cycle of reincarnation and returned to the god
above the world-creating Rulers (cf. Luke 12:58); there was no other way to be saved.
Those who engaged in each and every sin at least once would not be forced to live again. Having paid their
debts by exploring every nook and cranny of human life, they were no longer required to live in bodies.
Carpocrates claimed that Jesus revealed these secret teachings only to the disciples (Mark 4:10-11) who
could understand them. Love and faith were enough to attain salvation (cf. Gal. 5:6); good and bad existed
only as matters of human opinion.
Christian Cavemen
The controversy over Carpocrates didnt end with St. Irenaeus. St. Clement accuses the mischievous mystic of
stealing a copy of The Secret Gospel of Mark from the Church library in Alexandria and adapting it to suit his
blasphemous and carnal teachings.5
St. Clement doesnt tell us what these teachings were, but since Carpocrates was an enthusiastic student of
Platonic philosophy we can probably take an educated guess.
Secret Mark has Jesus spending the night in a cave showing the Kingdom of God to a man He raised
from the dead. Similarly, Platos cave myth compares ordinary waking life to imprisonment in a dark tunnel
filled with flickering shadows, a pit we can only escape with the help of philosophy.
Carpocrates probably combined the myth of Platos Cave with the teachings of Secret Mark and
adapted them to an initiation ritual intended to lead his students to the eternal world outside the cave.
Return to the Garden of Eden
Carpocrates goal was to escape from the universe; his son Epiphanes sought to reform it instead. A teenage
prodigy whose radical views on marriage and property have influenced generations of Christian freethinkers,
Epiphanes set out his philosophy in a revolutionary essay called On Righteousness and Justice.
God, Epiphanes argued, has provided sunlight and plant life indeed, the whole planet for our common
use and enjoyment. In a world of such abundance, why would theft or jealousy even exist?
These vices arose, Epiphanes concluded, when blind, ignorant men perverted Gods gifts by greedily
insisting on private ownership.
Given Gods limitless generosity, why did so many Christians insist on keeping their food, animals and land
locked up, not to mention their wives? By selfishly refusing to share the benefits of matrimony with their fellow
believers, werent they spiting the same God who blessed us with strong sexual drives and desires in the first
place?
Epiphanes had a novel response to the stifling traditions which had so provoked his father: When God told
His chosen not to swap wives He must have been joking.

Consequently one must understand the saying You shall not desire as if the lawgiver [God] was making a
jest, to which he added the even more comic words your neighbours goods [Exodus 20:17]. For he himself
who gave the desire to sustain the race orders that it is to be suppressed, though he removes it from no other
animals. And by the words your neighbours wife he says something even more ludicrous, since he forces
what should be common property to be treated as a private possession.6
Epiphanes subversive reading of Mosaic Law was shared by the Cainites, a mysterious second-century
Christian group who took their name from Abels homicidal brother. The Cainites were not escapists like the
Carpocratians or reformers like Epiphanes; instead we might describe them as saboteurs.
Like many other Gnostic Christian groups, the Cainites believed the Earth we inhabit was a sort of cosmic
prison or zoo, a labyrinth for the souls of the fallen and the lost ruled over by an incompetent and insane
Demiurge. This Demiurge was identified with Yahweh, the wrathful creator god of Genesis. His mother was
Sophia, the hidden Goddess of Wisdom. The Cainites rejected the diabolical Demiurge, looking instead to
Sophia (the superior power) for guidance and protection. Like Yahweh, Sophia had chosen people of her own;
through Cain, Judas, the Sodomites, and all of the other outcasts of the Old Testament, she worked tirelessly to
undermine Yahwehs authority. The Cainites were strong antinomians who treated sinning as a religious duty.
Through the systematic violation of Yahwehs moral laws, they sought to undo the actual physical laws (e.g.,
gravity, friction) which make life on Earth possible.
The Cainites invoked angels while sinning for assistance, not forgiveness in short, they were trying to
sabotage the Matrix: And they say they cannot be saved in any other way, except they pass through all things,
just as Carpocrates also said. And at every sinful and base action an angel is present and instills in him who
ventures the deed audacity and impurity And this is the perfect knowledge, to enter without fear into such
operations, which it is not lawful even to name.
With their audacious pursuit of unspeakable acts, the Cainites seem to have anticipated the pessimistic neoPlatonism of Jean Baudrillard, the French postmodernist whose concept of simulation has so influenced
contemporary science fiction:
For example: it would be interesting to see whether the repressive apparatus would not react more violently to a
simulated hold-up than to a real one? For the latter only upsets the order of things, the right of property, whereas
the other suggests, over and above its object, that law and order themselves might really be nothing more than
a simulation. In a simulated world, neither crime nor punishment can exist in any meaningful way how could
they, when victims, police and money are all just different aspects of the same illusion?
Conclusion
The antinomian legacy is wreathed in paradox. What little we know about these rebellious holy men comes only
from the reports of their enemies. What most Christians called sins the antinomian Gnostic called initiations
no wonder their message so horrified the establishment! The antinomian path asks difficult questions. Can we
make ourselves pure by wallowing in impurity? What is pure? What is impure? What is sin? What is not?
Does might make right? Does power corrupt? Is pleasure a crime? Do the same rules apply equally to everyone?
Are some laws higher than the laws of man? In a world where conventional morality defines civilian deaths as
collateral damage, prejudice as a family value, and pregnancy as an epidemic, we may find ourselves
agreeing with Batailles poignant plea for collective awakening when he writes:
Lift the curse of those feelings which oppress men, which force them into wars they do not want, and consign
them to work from whose fruits they never benefit Assume within oneself perversion and crime, not as
exclusive values, but as a prelude to their integration into the totality of humanity. Participate in the destruction
of a world as it presently exists, with eyes open to the world which is yet to be.9
Where nothing is true and everything is permitted, the antinomian becomes the only moralist worth listening to.
Perhaps these ancient heretics still have something to teach us today after all.
Footnotes:
1. Robert Svoboda, Aghora: At the Left Hand of God, pp 183-84, pub. 1986
2. Clement of Alexandria, Letter to Theodore, from Willis Barnstones The Other Bible, pp. 341-42, pub.
A.D.1984
3. St. Irenaeus of Lyon, Against Heresies, Barnstone, Ibid, pp. 648-49
4. 3. Luke 12:58 59; Matt. 5:25-26
5. Clement of Alexandria, Ibid.

6. Epiphanes, On Righteousness and Justice, Barnstone, Ibid, pp. 649-50

7. St. Irenaeus of Lyon, Against Heresies, Barnstone, Ibid, , pp. 651-52
8. Jean Baudrillard, Simulations, pp.38-39, pub. 1983
9. Radio National, Encounter: Georges Bataille, 22/4/2001, www.abc.net.au/rn/relig/enc/stories/s281136.htm

The Ten Major Principles of the Gnostic Revelation

From Exegesis, by Philip K. Dick
The Gnostic Christians of the second century believed that only a special revelation of knowledge rather than
faith could save a person. The contents of this revelation could not be received empirically or derived a priori.
They considered this special gnosis so valuable that it must be kept secret. Here are the ten major principles of
the gnostic revelation: The creator of this world is demented. The world is not as it appears, in order to hide the
evil in it, a delusive veil obscuring it and the deranged deity.
There is another, better realm of God, and all our efforts are to be directed toward
returning there bringing it here
Our actual lives stretch thousands of years back, and we can be made to remember our origin in the stars. Each
of us has a divine counterpart unfallen who can reach a hand down to us to awaken us. This other personality is
the authentic waking self; the one we have now is asleep and minor. We are in fact asleep, and in the hands of a
dangerous magician disguised as a good god, the deranged creator deity. The bleakness, the evil and pain in this
world, the fact that it is a deterministic prison controlled by the demented creator causes us willingly to split
with the reality principle early in life, and so to speak willingly fall asleep in delusion.
You can pass from the delusional prison world into the peaceful kingdom if the True Good God places you
under His grace and allows you to see reality through His eyes.
Christ gave, rather than received, revelation; he taught his followers how to enter the kingdom while still alive,
where other mystery religions only bring about
The Gnostic Christians of the second century believed that only a special revelation of knowledge rather than
faith could save a person. The contents of this revelation could not be received empirically or derived a priori.
They considered this special gnosis so valuable that it must be kept secret. Here are the ten major principles of
the gnostic revelation:
The creator of this world is demented. The world is not as it appears, in order to hide the evil in it, a delusive
veil obscuring it and the deranged deity. There is another, better realm of God, and all our efforts are to be
directed toward returning there bringing it here
Our actual lives stretch thousands of years back, and we can be made to remember our origin in the stars.
Each of us has a divine counterpart unfallen who can reach a hand down to us to awaken us. This other
personality is the authentic waking self; the one we have now is asleep and minor. We are in fact asleep, and in
the hands of a dangerous magician disguised as a good god, the deranged creator deity. The bleakness, the evil
and pain in this world, the fact that it is a deterministic prison controlled by the demented creator causes us
willingly to split with the reality principle early in life, and so to speak willingly fall asleep in delusion.
You can pass from the delusional prison world into the peaceful kingdom if the True Good God places you
under His grace and allows you to see reality through His eyes.
Christ gave, rather than received, revelation; he taught his followers how to enter the kingdom while still alive,
where other mystery religions only bring about : knowledge of it at the "other time" in "the other realm," not
here. He causes it to come here, and is the living agency to the Sole Good God (i.e. the Logos).
Probably the real, secret Christian church still exists, long underground, with the living Corpus Christi as its
head or ruler, the members absorbed into it. Through participation in it they probably have vast, seemingly
magical powers. The division into "two times" (good and evil) and "two realms" (good and evil) will abruptly
end with victory for the good time here, as the presently invisible kingdom separates and becomes visible. We
cannot know the date. During this time period we are on the sifting bridge being judged according to which
power we give allegiance to, the deranged creator demiurge of this world or the One Good God and his
kingdom, whom we know through Christ. To know these ten principles of Gnostic Christianity is to court
disaster.: knowledge of it at the "other time" in "the other realm," not here. He causes it to come here, and is the

living agency to the Sole Good God (i.e. the Logos). Probably the real, secret Christian church still exists, long
underground, with the living Corpus Christi as its head or ruler, the members absorbed into it. Through
participation in it they probably have vast, seemingly magical powers.
The division into "two times" (good and evil) and "two realms" (good and evil) will abruptly end with victory
for the good time here, as the presently invisible kingdom separates and becomes visible. We cannot know the
date.
During this time period we are on the sifting bridge being judged according to which power we give allegiance
to, the deranged creator demiurge of this world or the One Good God and his kingdom, whom we know through
Christ.
To know these ten principles of Gnostic Christianity is to court disaster.

The seven Sermons to the dead, written by Basilides in Alexandria,

the city where the East toucheth the West
Sermon 1
The Dead came back from Jerusalem, where they found not what they sought. They prayed me let them in and
besought my word, and thus I began my teaching. Harken: I begin with nothingness. Nothingness is the same as
fullness. In infinity full is no better than empty. Nothingness is both empty and full. As well might ye say
anything else of nothingness,as for instance, white is it, or black, or again, it is not, or it is. A thing that is
infinite and eternal hath no qualities, since it hath all qualities. This nothingness or fullness we name the
Pleroma. Therein both thinking and being cease, since the eternal and infinite possess no qualities. In it no being
is, for he then would be distinct from the pleroma, and would possess qualities which would distinguish him as
something distinct from the pleroma. In the pleroma there is nothing and everything. It is quite fruitless to think
about the pleroma, for this would mean self-dissolution. Creatura is not in the pleroma, but in itself. The
pleroma is both beginning and end of the created beings. It pervadeth them, as the light od the sun everywhere
pervadeth the air. Although the pleroma prevadeth altogether, yet hath created being no share thereof, just as
wholly transparent body becometh neither light nor dark through the light nor dark through the light which
pervadeth it. We are,however , the pleroma itself, for we are a part of the eternal and the infinite. But we have
no share thereof, as we are from the pleroma infinitely removed; not spiritually or temporally, but essentially,
since we are distinguished from the pleroma in our essence as creatura, which is confined within time and
space.
Yet because we are parts of the pleroma, the pleroma is also in us. Even in the smallest point is the pleroma
endless, eternal, and entire, since small and great are qualities which are contained in it. It is that nothingness
which is everywhere whole and continuous. Only figuratively, therefore, do I speak of created being as part of
the pleroma. Because, actually, the pleroma is nowhere divided, since it is nothingness. We are also the whole
pleroma, because, figuratively, the pleroma is the smallest point (assumed only, not existing) in us and the
boundless firmanent about us. But wherefore, then, do we speak of the pleroma at all, since it is thus everything
and nothing? I speak of it to make a beginning somewhere, and also to free you from the delusion that
somewhere, either without or within, there standeth something fixed, or in some way established, from the
beginning. Every so-called fixed and certain thing is only relative. That alone is fixed and certain which is
subject to change. What is changeable, however, is creature. Therefore is it the one thing which is fixed and
certain because it hath qualities: or as even a quality itself.
The question ariseth: How did creatura originate? Created beings came to pass, not creatura: since created being
is the very quality of the pleroma, as much as non-creation which is the eternal death. In all times and places is
creation, in all times and places is death. The pleroma hath all, distinctiveness and non-distinctiveness.
Distinctiveness is creatura.It is distinct. Distinctivness is its essence. and therefore it distinguisheth. Wherefore
also he distinguished qualities of the pleroma which are not. He distinguisheth them out of his own nature.
Therefore he must speak of qualities of the pleroma which are not.
What use, say ye, to speak of it? Saidst thou not thyself, there is no profit in thinking upon the pleroma? That

said I unto you, to free you from the delusion that we are able to think about the pleroma. When we distinguish
qualities of the pleroma, we are speaking from the ground of our own distinctiveness and concerning our own
distinctiveness. But we have said nothing concerning the pleroma. Concerning our own distinctiveness,
however, it is needfull to speak, whereby we may distinguish ourselves enough. Our very nature is
distinctiveness. If we are not true to this nature we do not distinguish ourselves enough. Therefore must we
make distinctions of qualities.
What is the harm, ye ask, in not distingusihing oneself? If we do not distinguish, we get beyond our own nature,
away from creatura. We fall into indistinctiveness, which is the other quality of the pleroma. We fall into the
pleroma itself and cease to be creatures. We are given over to dissolution in nothingness. This is the death of the
creature. Therefore we die in such measure as we do not distinguish. Hence the natural striving of the creature
goeth towards distinctiveness, fighteth against primeval, perilous sameness. This is called the PRINCIPIUM
INDIVIDUATIONIS. This principle is the essence of the creature. From this you can see why indistictiveness
and non-distinction are a great danger for the creature. We must, therefore, distinguish the qualities of the
pleroma. The qualities are PAIRS OF OPPOSITES, such as - The Effective and the ineffective.
Sermon 2
In the night the dead stood along the wall and cried: We would have knowledge of god.Where is god? Is god
dead? God is not dead. Now, as ever, he liveth. God is creatura, for he is something definite, and therefore
distinct from the pleroma. God is quality of the pleroma, and everything I said of creatura also is true
concerning him. He is distinguished, however, from created beings through this, that he is more indefinite and
indeterminable than they. He is less distinct than created beings, since the ground of his being is effective
fullness. Only in so far as he is definite and distinct is he creatura, and in like measure is he the manifestation of
the effective fullness of the pleroma.
Everthing which we do not distinguish falleth into the pleroma and is made void by its opposite. If, therefore,
we do noy distinguish god, effective fullness is for us extinguished. Moreover god is the pleroma itself, as
likewise each smallest point in the created and uncreated is pleroma itself. Effective void is the nature of the
devil. God and decil are the first manifestations of nothingness, which we call the pleroma. It is indifferent
wether the pleroma is or is not, since in everything it is balanced and void. Not so creatura. In so far as god and
devil are creatura they do not extinguish each other, but stand one against the other as effective opposites. We
need no proof of their existence. It is enough that we must always be speaking of them. Even if both were not,
creatura, of its own essential distinctiveness, would forever distinguish them anew out of the pleroma.
Everything that discrimination taketh out of the pleroma is a pair of opposites. To God, therefore, always
belongeth the devil. This inseparability is as close and, as your own life hath made you see, as indissoluble as
the pleroma itself. Thus it is that both stand very close to the pleroma, in which all opposites are extinguished
and joined.
God and devil are distinguished by the qualities of fullness and emptiness, generation and destruction.
EFFECTIVENESS is common to both. Effectiveness joineth them. Effectiveness, therefore, standeth above
both; is a god above god, since in its effect it uniteth fullness and emptiness. This is a god whom ye knew not,
for mankind forgot it. We name it by its name ABRAXAS. It is more indefinite still than god and devil. That
god may be distinguished from it, we name god HELIOS or sun. Abraxas is effect. Nothing standeth opposed to
it but the ineffective; hence its effective natyre freely unfoldeth itself. The ineffective is not, therefore resisteth
not. Abraxas standeth above the sun and above the devil. It is improbable probability, unreal reality. Had the
pleroma a being, Abraxas would be its manifestation. It is the effective itself, nor any particular effect, but effect
in general.
It is unreal reality, because it hath no definite effect. It is also creatura, because it is distinct from the pleroma.
The sun hath a definite effect, and so hath the devil. Wherefore do they appear to us more effective than
indefinite Abraxas. It is force, duration, change. The dead now raised a great tumult, for they were Christians.
Sermon 3
Like mists arising from a marsh, the dead came near and cried: Speak further unto us concerning the supreme
god. Hard to know is the deity of Abraxas. Its power is the greatest, because man perceiveth it not. From the sun
he draweth the summum bonum; from the devil the infimum malum: but from Abraxas LIFE, altogether
indefinite, the mother of good and evil.
Smaller and weaker life seemeth to be than the summum bonum; wherefore is it also hard to conceive that

Abraxas transcendeth even the sun in power, who is himself the radient source of all the force of life. Abraxas is
the sun, and at the same time the eternally sucking gorge of the void, the belittling and dismembering devil.
The power of Abraxas is twofold; but ye see it not, because for your eyes the warring opposites of this power
are extinguished. What the god-sun speaketh is life. What the devil speaketh is death. But Abraxas speaketh that
hallowed and accursed word which is life and death at the same time. Abraxas begetteth truth and lying, good
and evil, light and darkness, in the same word and in the same act. Wherefore is Abraxas terrible. It is splendid
as the lion in the instant he striketh down his victim. It is beautiful as a day in spring. It is the great Pan himself
and also the small one. It is Priapos. It is the monster of the under-world, a thousand-armed polyp, coiled knot
of winged serpents, frenzy. It is the hermaphrodite of the earliest beginning. It is the lord of the toads and frogs,,
which live in the water and gets up on the land, whose chorus ascendeth at noon and at midnight. It is
abundance that seeketh union with emptiness. It is holy begetting. It is love and love's murder. It is the saint and
his betrayer. It is the brightest light of day and the darkest night of madness. To look upon it, is blindness. To
know it, is sickness. To worship it, is death. To fear it, is wisdom. To resist it not, is redemption.
God dwelleth behind the sun, the devil behind the night. What god bringeth forth out of the light of the devil
sucketh into the night. But Abraxas is the world, its becoming and its passing- Upon every gift that cometh from
the god-sun the devil layeth his curse.
Everything that ye entreat from the god-sun begetteth a deed from the devil. Everything that ye create with the
god-sun giveth effective power to the devil. That is terrible Abraxas. It is the mightiest creature, and in it the
creature is afraid of itself. It is the manifest opposition to the pleroma and its nothingness. It is the son's horror
of the mother. It is the mother's love for the son. It is the delight of the earth and the cruelty of the heavens.
Before its countenance man becometh like stone. Before it there is no question and no reply. It is the life of
creatura. It is the operation of distinctiveness. It is the love of man. It is the speech of man. It is the appearance
and the shadow of man. It is illusory reality.
Now the dead howled and raged, for they were unperfected.
Sermon 4
The dead filled the place murmuring and said; Tell us of gods and devils, accursed one! The god-suun is the
highest good, the devil its opposite. Thus have ye two gods. But there are many high and good things and many
great evils. Among these are two god-devils; the one is the Burning One , the other the Growing One. The
burning one is EROS, who hath the form of flame. Flame giveth light because it consumeth. The growing one is
the TREE OF LIFE.. It buddeth, as in growing it heapeth up living stuff. Eros flameth up and dieth. But the tree
of life groweth with slow and constant increase through unmeasured time. Good and evil are united in the
flame. Good and evil are united in the increase of the tree. In their divinity stand life and love opposed.
Innumerable as the host of the stars is the number of gods and devils. Each star is a god, and each space that a
star filleth is a devil. But the empty-fullness of the whole is the pleroma. The operation of the whole is Abraxas,
to whom only the ineffective standeth opposed. Four is the number of the principal gods, as four is the number
of the world's measurements. One is the beginning, the god-sun. Two is Eros; for he bindeth twain together and
outspreadeth himself in brightness. Three is the Tree of Life, for it filleth space with bodily forms. Four is the
devil, for he openeth all that is closed. All that is formed of bodily nature doth he dissolve; he is the destroyer in
whom everything is brought to nothing.
For me, to whom knowledge hath been given of the multiplicity and diversity of the good, it is well. But woe
unto you, who replace these incompatible many by a single god. For in so doing ye beget the torment which is
bred from not understanding, and ye mutilate the creature whose nature and aim is distinctiveness. How can ye
be true to your own nature when ye try to change the many into one? What ye do unto the gods is done likewise
unto you. Ye all become equal and thus is your nature maimed.
Equalities shall prevail not for god, but only for the sake of man. For the gods are many, whilst men are few.
The gods are mighty and can endure their manifoldness. For like the stars they abide in solitude, parted one
from the other by immense distances. Therefore they dwell together and need communion, that they may bear
their separateness. For redemtion's sake I teach you the rejected truth, for the sake of which I was rejected. The
multiplicity of the gods correspondeth to the multiplicity of man. Numberless gods await the human state.
Numberless gods have been men. Man shareth in nature of the gods. He cometh from the gods and goeth unto
god. Thus, just as it serveth not to reflect upon the plerome, it availeth not to worship the multiplicity of the
gods. Least of all availeth it to worship the first god, the effective abundance and the summum bonum.. By our

prayer we can add to it nothing, and from it nothing take; because the effective void swalloweth all. The bright
gods form the celestial world. It is manifold and infinitely spreading and increasing. The god-sun is the supreme
lord of the world. The dark gods form the earth-world. They are simple and infinitely diminishing and
declining. The devil is the earth-world's lowest lord, the moon-spirit, satellite of the earth, smaller, colder, and
more dead than the earth. There is no difference between the might of the celestial gods and those of the earth.
The celestial gods magnify, the earth-gods diminish. Measurelesss is the movement of both.
Sermon 5
The dead mocked and cried: Teach us, fool, of the Church and the holy Communion. The world of the gods is
made manifest in spirituality and in sexuality. The celestial ones appear in spirituality, the earthly in sexuality.
Spirituality conceiveth and embraceth. It is womanlike and therefore we call it MATER COELESTIS, the
celestial mother. Sexuality engendereth and createth. It is manlike, and therefore we call it PHALLOS, the
earthly father. The sexuality of man is more of the earth, the sexuality of woman is more of the spirit. The
spirituality of man is more of heaven, it goeth to the greater. The spirituality of woman is more of the earth, it
goeth to the smaller. Lying and devilish is the spirituality of the man which goeth to the smaller. Lying and
devilish is the spirituality of the woman which goeth to the greater. Each must go its own place. Man and
woman become devils one to the other when they divide not their spiritual ways, for the nature of the creatura is
distinctiveness. The sexuality of man hath an earthward course, the sexuality of woman a spiritual. Man and
woman becomes devils one to the other if they distinguish not their sexuality. Man shall know of the smaller,
woman the greater. Man shall distinguish himself both from spirituality and sexuality. He shall spirituality
Mother, and set her between heaven and earth. He shall call sexuality Phallos, annd set him between himself
and earth. For the Mother and the Phallos are super-human daemons which reveal the world of the gods. They
are for us more effective than the gods, because they are closely akin to our own nature. Should ye not
distinguish yourselves from sexuality and from spirituality, and not regard them as of a nature borh above you
and beyond, then are ye delivered over to them as qualities of the pleroma. Spirituality and sexuality are not
your qualities, not things ye possess and contain. But they possess and contain you; for they are powerfull
daemons, manifestations of the gods, and are, therefore, things which reach beyond you, existing in themselves.
No man hath a spirituality unto himself, or a sexuality unto himself. But he standeth under the law of
Spirituality and of sexuality. No man, therefore, escapeth these daemons. Ye shall look upn them as daemons,
and as a common task and danger, a common burdon which life hath laid upon you. Thus is life for you also a
common task and danger, as are the gods, and first of all terrible Abraxas. Man is weak, therefore is communion
indispensable. If your communion be not under the sign of the Mother, then is it under the sign of the Phallos.
No communion is suffering and sickness. Communion in everything is dismemberment and dissolution.
Distinctiveness leadeth to singleness. Singleness is opposed to communion. But because of man's weakneess
over against the gods and daemons and their invincible law is communion needful, not for man's sake, but
because of the gods.The gods force you to communion. As much as they force you, so much is the communion
needed, more is evil. In communion let every man submit to the others, that communion be maintained, for ye
need it. In Singleness the one man shall be superior to the others, that every man may come to himself and
avoid slavery. In communion there shall be continence. In Singleness there shall be prodigality. Communion is
depth. Singleness is height. Right measure in communion purifieth and preserveth. Right measure in Singleness
purifieth and increaseth. Communion giveth us warmth, Singleness giveth us light.
Sermon 6
The daemons of sexuality approacheth our soul as a serpent. It is half human and appeareth as thought-desire.
The daemon of spirituality descendeth into our soul as the white bird. It is half human and appeareth as desirethought. The Serpent is an earthly soul, half daemonic, a spirit, and akin to the spirits of the dead. Thus too, like
these, she swarmeth around in the things of earth, making us either fear them or pricking us with intemperate
desires. The Serpent hath a nature like unto woman. She seeketh company of the dead who are held by the spell
of the earth, they who found not the way beyond that leadeth to singleness. The Serpent is a whore. She
wantoneth with the devil and with evil spirits; a mischievous tyrant and tormentor, ever seducing to evilest
company. The White Bird is a half-celestial soul of man. He bideth with the Mother, from time to time
descending.The bird hath a nature like unto man, and is effective thought. He is chaste and solitary, a messenger
of the Mother. He flieth high above earth. He commandeth singleness. He bringeth knowledge from the distant
ones who went before and are perfected. He beareth our word above to the Mother. She intercedeth, she

warneth, but against the gods she hath no power. She is a vessel of the sun. The serpent goeth below and with
her cunning she lameth the phallic daemon, or else goadeth him on. She yieldeth up the too crafty toughts of the
earthy one, those thoughts which creep through every hole and cleave to all things with desirousness. The
Serpent, doubtless, willeth it not, yet she must be of use to us. She fleeth our grasp , thus showing us the way,
which with our human wits we could not find.
With disdainful glance the dead spake: Cease this talk of gods and daemons and souls. At this hath long been
known to us.
Sermon 7
Yet when night was come the dead again approached with lamentable mien and said: There is yet one matter we
forgot to mention. Teach us about man. Man is a gateway, through which from the outer world of gods,
daemons, and souls ye pass into the inner world; out of the greater into the smaller world. Small and transitory
is man. Already is he behind you, and once again ye find yourselves in endless space, in the smaller of
innermost infinity. At immeasurable distance standeth one single Star in the zenith. This is the one god of this
one man. This is his world, his pleroma, his divinity. In this world is man Abraxas, the creator and destroyer of
his one world. This Star is the god and the goal of man. This is his one guiding god. In him goeth man to his
rest. Toward him goeth the long journey of the soul after death. In him shineth forth as light all that man
bringeth back from the greater world. To this one god man shall pray. Prayer increaseth the light of the Star. It
casteth a bridge over death. It prepareth life for the smaller world and assuageth the hopleless desires of the
greater. When the greater world waxeth cold, burneth the Star. Between man and his one god there standeth
nothing, so long as man can turn away his eyes from the flaming spectacle of Abraxas. Man here, god there.
Weakness and nothingness here, there eternally creative power. Here nothing but darkness and chilling
moisture. There Wholly Sun. Whereupon the dead were silent and ascended like the smoke above the herdman's
fire, who through the night kept watch over his flock.
ANAGRAMMA: GAHINNEVERAHTUNIN ZEHGESSURKLACH ZUNNUS.
Good and Evil. Beauty and Ugliness. The One and the Many.
The pairs of opposities are qualities of the pleroma which are not, because each balanceth each. As we are the
pleroma itself, we also have all these qualities in us. Because the very ground of our nature is distinctiveness,
which meaneth 1. These qualities are distinct and seperate in us one from the other; therefore they are not balanced and void,
but are effective. Thus are the victims of the pairs of opposites. The pleroma is rent in us.
2. The qualities belong to the pleroma, and only in the name and sign of distinctiveness can and must we
possess and live them. We must distinguish ourselves from qualities. In the pleroma they are balanced and void;
in us not. Being distinguished from them delivereth us. When we strive after the good or the beautiful, we
thereby forget our own nature, which is disinctiveness, and we are delivered over to the qualities of the pleroma,
which are pairs of opposites. We labor to attain the good and the beautiful, yet at the same time we also lay hold
of the evil and the ugly, since in the pleroma these are one with the good and the beautiful. When, however, we
remain true to our own nature, which is distinctiveness, we distinguish ourselves from the good and the
beautiful,therefore, at the same time, from the evil and ugly. And thus we fall not into the pleroma, namely, into
nothingness and dissolution. Thou sayest, ye object, that difference and sameness are also qualities of the
pleroma. How would it be, then, if we strive after difference? Are we, in so doing, not true to our own nature?
And must we none the less be given over to the sameness when we strive after difference? Ye must not forget
that the pleroma hath no qualities. We create them through thinking. If, therefore, ye strive after difference or
sameness, or any qualities whatsoever, ye pursue thought which flow to you our of the pleroma: thoughts,
namely, concerning non-existing qualities of the pleroma. Inasmuch as ye run after these thoughts, ye fall again
into the pleroma, and reach difference and sameness at the same time. Not your thhinking, but your being, is
distinctiveness. Therefore not after difference, ye think it, must ye strive; but after YOUR OWN BEING. At
bottom, therefore, there is only one striving, namely, the striving after your own being. If ye had this striving ye
would not need to know anything about the pleroma and its qualities, and yet would ye come to your right goal
by virtue of your own being. Since, however, thought estrangeth from being, that knowledge must I trach you
wherewith ye may be able to hold your thought in leash.

Shamanism
A Master of Ecstasy
"The word shaman comes to English from the Tungus language via Russian. Among the Tungus of Siberia it is
both a noun and a verb. While the Tungus have no word for shamanism, it has come into usage by
anthropologists, historians of religion and others in contemporary society to designate the experience and the
practices of the shaman. Its usage has grown to include similar experiences and practices in cultures outside of
the original Ural-Altaic cultures from which the term shaman originated. Thus shamanism is not the name of a
religion or group of religions."
"Shamanism is classified by anthropologists as an archaic magico-religious phenomenon in which the shaman is
the great master of ecstasy. Shamanism itself, was defined by the late Mircea Eliade as a technique of ecstasy. A
shaman may exhibit a particular magical specialty (such as control over fire, wind or magical flight). When a
specialization is present the most common is as a healer. The distinguishing characteristic of shamanism is its
focus on an ecstatic trance state in which the soul of the shaman is believed to leave the body and ascend to the
sky (heavens) or descend into the earth (underworld). The shaman makes use of spirit helpers, which he or she
communicates with, all the while retaining control over his or her own consciousness. (Examples of possession
occur, but are the exception, rather than the rule.) It is also important to note that while most shamans in
traditional societies are men, either women or men may and have become shamans."
- Dean Edwards, "Shamanism-General Overview" (FAQ)
"These myths refer to a time when communication between heaven and earth was possible; in consequence of a
certain event or a ritual fault, the communication was broken off, but heroes and medicine men are nevertheless
able to reestablish it."
- Mircea Elliade, Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy
"By entering an ecstatic state, induced by ritual dancing and the invocation of spirits, the shaman is believed
able to return to that time, visiting heaven and hell to talk with gods, spirits of the dead, and animals."
- Cosmic Duality
"Shamans reach the state that gives them access to the supernatural world in a variety of ways. A very common
way is by ingesting mind-altering drugs of various types."
- James Davila, "Enoch as a Divine Mediator"
"It is the Siberian and Latin American shamans who have most often employed psychedelics as booster rockets
to launch their cosmic travels. In Siberia the preferred substance has been the mushroom known as Amanita
muscaria or agaric. This is perhaps the much-praised soma of early Indian religion as well as one of the drugs
referred to in European legends."
- Roger N.Walsh, The Spirit of Shamanism
"Another common method is to listen to the protracted pounding of a drum. Less direct methods are also widely
practiced. These include various forms of isolation and self-denial, such as fasting, solitary confinement,
celibacy, dietary and purity restrictions, and protracted prayer. Igjugarjuk, a Caribou Inuit shaman, claims to
have been isolated by his mentor in a small snow hut where he fasted and meditated in the cold, drinking only a
little water twice, for thirty days. After his initiatory vision (see below) he continued a rigorous regime
involving a special diet and celibacy. Leonard Crow Dog, a Native American Sioux shaman, describes in detail
the process of his first vision quest. He participated in a sweat lodge ceremony for spiritual cleansing, then was
taken to a fasting place of his family's, where he was wrapped naked in a blanket and left in a hole to fast and
pray alone for two days (an adult shaman will fast four or more days). Wallace Black Elk also frequently
describes both the sweat lodge ('stone-people-lodge') ceremony and the vision quest. Ascetic practices by

Japanese shamans are especially prevalent among those who actively seek shamanhood rather than being called
by a deity. These practices include fasting and dietary restrictions of various kinds, seclusion in a dark place,
walking pilgrimages between sacred places, and rigorous regimes of immersion and bathing in ice-cold water.
These disciplines, especially the endurance of cold, eventually fill the shaman with heat and spiritual might."
- James Davila, "Enoch as a Divine Mediator"
"Let him who would join himself to the prince of Torah wash his garments and his clothes and let him immerse
(in) a strict immersion as a safeguard in case of pollution. And let him dwell for twelve days in a room or in an
upper chamber. Let him not go out or come in, and he must neither eat nor drink. But from evening to evening
see that he eats his bread, clean bread of his own hands, and he drinks pure water, and that he does not taste any
kind of vegetable. And let him insert this midrash of the prince of Torah into the prayer three times in every
single day; it is after the prayer that he should pray it from its beginning to its end. And afterward, let him sit
and recite during the twelve days, the days of his fasting, from morning until evening, and let him not be silent.
And in every hour that he finishes it let him stand on his feet and adjure by the servants (and?) by their king,
twelve times by every single prince. Afterward let him adjure every single one of them by the seal."
- Sar Torah, paras. 299-300
The shaman is said to 'make a journey,' during which he is spoken to by the spirits, who give him curing
instructions and make their wishes known for certain kinds of propitiatory sacrifices; they may also appear to
him in the form of visions or apparitions. Motifs of death and rebirth, often involving bodily dismemberment
and reassimilation, are common in shamanism..."
- McKenna and McKenna, The Invisible Landscape
"...It appears that shamans are able to draw on a range of psychologically skillful diagnostic and therapeutic
techniques accumulated by their predecessors over centuries. Some of these techniques clearly foreshadow ones
widely used today and thereby confirm the reputation of shamans as humankind's first psychotherapists."
- Roger N.Walsh, The Spirit of Shamanism
"We know today that the medicine man derives his power from a circular feedback involving his personal myth
and the hopes and expectations of those who share it with him. The ensuing 'mutual exaltation' was studied by
McDougal and by Gustave LeBon many years ago. It is still regarded as one of the key factors in the
psychology of masses. It has subsequently been reinterpreted in Freudian terms as the individual's willing
surrender to an all-powerful father figure capable of meeting the childish dependency needs still lingering in
members of the group."
- Ehrewald, The ESP Experience
"Shamanism often exists alongside and even in cooperation with the religious or healing practices of the
community....Knowledge of other realms of being and consciousness and the cosmology of those regions is the
basis of the shamanic perspective and power. With this knowledge, the shaman is able to serve as a bridge
between the mundane and the higher and lower states. The shaman lives at the edge of reality as most people
would recognize it and most commonly at the edge of society itself."
- Dean Edwards, "Shamanism-General Overview" (FAQ)

Initiation Rituals
"A common experience of the call to shamanism is a psychic or spiritual crisis, which often accompanies a
physical or even a medical crisis, and is cured by the shaman him or herself....The shaman is often marked by
eccentric behavior such as periods of melancholy, solitude, visions, singing in his or her sleep, etc. The inability
of the traditional remedies to cure the condition of the shamanic candidate and the eventual self cure by the new

shaman is a significant episode in development of the shaman. The underlying significant aspect of this
experience, when it is present, is the ability of the shaman to manage and resolve periods of distress."
- Dean Edwards, "Shamanism-General Overview" (FAQ)
"Frequently a candidate will gain shamanic powers during a visionary experience in which he or she undergoes
some form of death or personal destruction and disintegration at the hands of divine beings, followed by a
corresponding resurrection or reintegration that purges and gives a qualitatively different life to the initiate. For
example, the Siberian (Tagvi Samoyed) Sereptie, in his long and arduous initiatory vision (on which see below),
was at one point reduced to a skeleton and then was 'forged' with a hammer and anvil. Autdaruta, an Inuit
initiate, had a vision in which he was eaten by a bear and then was vomited up, having gained power over the
spirits."
- James R. Davila, "Hekhalot Literature and Mysticism"
"I saw that I was painted red all over, and my joints were painted black, with white stripes between the joints.
My bay had lightning stripes all over him and his mane was cloud. And when I breathed, my breath was
lightning."
- Nick Black Elk, in the narrative of his Great Vision
"...The important moments of a shamanic initiation are these five; first, torture and violent dismemberment of
the body; second, scraping away of the flesh until the body is reduced to a skeleton; third, substitution of viscera
and reveal of the blood; fourth, a period spent in Hell, during which the future shaman is taught by the souls of
dead shamans and by 'demons'; fifth, an ascent to Heaven to obtain consecration from the God of Heaven"
- Mircea Eliade, Rites and Symbols of Initiation
"They are cut up by demons or by their ancestral spirits; their bones are cleaned, the flesh scraped off, the body
fluids thrown away, and their eyes torn from their sockets...His bones are then covered with new flesh and in
some cases he is also given new blood."
- Fabrega and Silver in Behavioral Science 15
"The ecstatic experience of the shaman goes beyond a feeling or perception of the sacred, the demonic or of
natural spirits. It involves them shaman directly and actively in transcendent realities or lower realms of being."
"The shaman is not recognized as legitimate without having undergone two types of training:
1) Ecstatic (dreams, trances, etc.)
2) Traditional ('shamanic techniques, names and functions of spirits,mythology and genealogy of the clan, secret
language, etc.)
The two-fold course of instruction, given by the spirits and the old master shamans is equivalent to an
initiation.' [Mircea Eliade, The Encyclopedia of Religion, v. 13 , p. 202; Mcmillian, N.Y., 1987.] It is also
possible for the entire process to take place in the dream state or in ecstatic experience."
- Dean Edwards, "Shamanism-General Overview" (FAQ)
"The novice's task of learning to see the spirits involves two stages. The first is simply to catch an initial
glimpse of them. The second is to deepen and stabilize this glimpse into a permanent visionary capacity in
which the spirits can be summoned and seen at will."
- Roger N. Walsh, The Spirit of Shamanism
"All this long and tiring ceremony has as its object transforming the apprentice magician's initial and
momentary and ecstatic experience...into a permanent condition - that in which it is possible to see the spirits."
- Mircea Elliade, Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy
"The next thing an old shaman has to do for his pupil is to procure him anak ua by which is meant his
'angakoq', i.e., the altogether special and particular element which makes this man an angakoq (shaman). It is
also called his quamenEg his 'lightning' or 'enlightenment', for anak ua consists of a mysterious light which the

shaman suddenly feels in his body, inside his head, within the brain, an inexplicable searchlight, a luminous fire,
which enables him to see in the dark both literally and metaphorically speaking, for he can now, even with
closed eyes see through darkness and perceive things and coming events which are hidden from others; thus
they look into the future and into the secrets of others.
"The first time a young shaman experiences this light...it is as if the house in which he is suddenly rises; he sees
far ahead of him, through mountains, exactly as if the earth were on a great plain, and his eyes could reach to
the end of the earth. Nothing is hidden from him any longer; not only can he see things far, far away, but he can
also discover souls, stolen souls, which are either kept concealed in far, strange lands or have been taken up or
down to the Land of the dead."
- K. Rasmussen, Intellectual Culture of the Iglulik Eskimos

A Second Real World

"The pre-eminently shamanic technique is the passage from one cosmic region to another - from earth to the sky
or from earth to the underworld. The shaman knows the mystery of the breakthrough in plane. This
communication among the cosmic zones is made possible by the very structure of the universe."
- Mircea Eliade, Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy
"The main feature of the shamans' universe is...the cosmic center, a bond or axis connecting earth, heaven and
hell. It is often pictured as a tree or a pole holding up the sky. In a trance state, a shaman can travel disembodied
from one region to another, climbing the tree into the heavens or following its downward extension. By doing
so he can meet and consult the gods. There is always a numerical factor. He climbs through a fixed number of
celestial stages, or descends through a fixed number of infernal ones. His key number may be expressed in his
costume - for example, in a set of bells which he attaches to it. The key number varies from shaman to shaman
and from tribe to tribe."
- Geoffrey Ashe, The Ancient Wisdom
"He commands the techniques of ecstasy - that is, because his soul can safely abandon his body and roam at
vast distances, can penetrate the underworld and rise to the sky. Through his own ecstatic experience he knows
the roads of the extraterrestrial regions. He can go below and above because he has already been there. The
danger of losing his way in these forbidden regions is still great; but sanctified by his initiation and furnished
with his guardian spirit, a shaman is the only human being able to challenge the danger and venture into a
mystical geography."
- Mircea Elliade, Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy
"In the ages of the rude beginnings of culture, man believed that he was discovering a second real world in
dream, and here is the origin of metaphysics. Without dream, mankind would never have had occasion to invent
such a division of the world. The parting of soul and body goes also with this way of interpreting dream;
likewise, the idea of a soul's apparitional body: whence, all belief in ghosts, and apparently, too, in gods."
- Neitzsche, Human, All-Too-Human
"We must recognize ourselves as beings of four dimensions. Do we not in sleep live in a fantastic fairy kingdom
where everything is capable of transformation, where there is no stability belonging to the physical world,
where one man can become another or two men at the same time, where the most improbable things look simple
and natural, where events often occur in inverse order, from end to beginning, where we see the symbolical
images of ideas and moods, where we talk with the dead, fly in the air, pass through walls, are drowned or
burnt, die and remain alive?"
- P. D. Ouspensky

Perception in Trance States

The ceremonies of the Cult of the Horned god were first found in the Paleolithic cave paintings of Ariege which
depicted a dancing figure in the skin of a horned animal.
Cave paintings from the Upper Paleolithic (20-30,000 years ago) depicts zig zags and dots combined with
realistic images of animals against grid forms. Similar abstract geometric are also found in the ritual art of the
South African bushman where the trance dance of the shaman is a central unifying force of the community. In
the dance the shaman perceives his body as stretching and becoming elongated. His spirit soars out of the top of
his head and is transformed into an animal. In the century old depictions of the trance dance, the bushman
shaman absorb the energy of a dying eland and take on many of the magic animal's physical characteristics. He
perceives his transformed state as similar to being under water; he has difficulty breathing and feels weightless.
When he returns from his spirit journey he is able to perform healing and even his sweat supposedly posses
curative powers. A few days later the shaman would be able to reflect upon his experience and paint it in natural
rock shelters found in the surrounding cliffs. There was no esoteric stream of wisdom and everyone in the
village would share in knowledge of the spirit world.
Psychologists differentiate two stages in trance states induced by drugs, fasting and/or sensory deprivation.
1.) Antopic forms - abstract geometric forms such as grids, dots and spirals
2.) Realistic images from memory combined in surreal ways against a geometric background.
The Paleolithic paintings depicts similar hallucinatory images to the modern bushman's but differ in one
respect; they were not done out in the open but in the deep, dark recesses of caves. Was the sensory deprivation
of being immersed in the dark a means of inducing a trance state in the Cro-Magnon shaman?
- "Images of Another World"
An episode of Ancient Mysteries broadcast by the A&E Network
"Among the Eskimo shaman's clairvoyance is the result of qaumenaq, which means 'lightning' or 'illumination'.
It is a mysterious light which the shaman suddenly feels in his body, inside his head, within the brain, enabling
him to see in the dark, both literally and metaphorically speaking, for he can now even with closed eyes, see
through darkness and perceive things and coming events which are hidden from others. With the experience of
the light goes a feeling of ascension, distant vision, clairvoyance, the perception of invisible entities and
foreknowledge of the future. There is an interesting parallel, despite differences, in the initiation of Australian
medicine-men, who go through a ritual death, and are filled with solidified light in the form of rock-crystals; on
returning to life they have similar powers of clairvoyance and extra-sensory perception."
- John Ferguson, An Illustrated Encyclopaedia of Mysticism and the Mystery Religions
Hypnogogic images
"Hypnogogic images are the germinal stuff of dreams, and they usually begin with flashes of light. Often, an
illuminated circle, lozenge, or other generally round form appears to come nearer and nearer, swelling to
gigantic size. This particular image is known as the Isakower phenomenon, named after an Austrian
psychoanalyst who first identified it. Isakower claimed the image was rooted in the memory of the mother's
breast as it approached the infant's mouth."
"Hypnagogic images can be interpreted in many different ways. Literally and figuratively, it's all in the eye of
the beholder. The drowsy person in the hypnagogic state is just as open to suggestions as subjects in the
hypnotized state."
"When people start floating n the hypnagogic state, the amplitude and frequency of brainwaves decrease. The
alpha rhythms of wakefulness are progressively replaced by slower theta activity. This translates to a loss of
volitional control, a sense of paralysis. As the person descends further into sleep itself, the outside physical
world retreats to the fringe of consciousness and the new reality becomes the internal dream world."

The final stage of hypnagogic images is, "polyopia, the multiplication of the image, usually seen in one
eye....These specks of light...are produced by electrical activity in the visual system and brain. One can almost
imagine the specks representing electric sparks flying along the neural pathways of the brain." They may look
like hundred of stars "but they can also take the form of spots, circles, swirls, grids, checkerboards, or other
figures composed of curves or lines. They are easy to see in the dark, but, in the light, they are on the borderline
of perception."
"Even when the hypnagogic forms are not consciously noticed, they can still register as subliminal stimuli and
influence subsequent image formation and fantasy."
- Ronald K.Siegel, Fire in the Brain

Other Shamaism Sites

Shamanism
Excellent source for FAQs, articles and links, particularly on South American shamans
What is Shamanism?
A well-written FAQ describing the role of the shaman and altered states of reality

Hyperlinks

Altered States
The Apocryphal Book of Enoch
The Cult of Dionysos
Cyberspace - the New Jerusalem
The Dreams We Race
The Kabbalah
The Sefirot
Shambhala
Underground Streams
Surprising Works

What Is a Gnostic?
by Stephan A. Hoeller

Gnosticism, they say, is on the upsurge...

So just what is it?
Are we witnessing a rediscovery of Gnosticism? To judge from the burgeoning
new literature and the increased use of the terms "gnosis" and "Gnosticism" in
popular publications, the answer would seem to be yes. Only twenty-five years
ago, when one used the word "Gnostic," it was very likely to be misunderstood
as "agnostic," and thus have one's statement turned into its exact opposite. Such
misapprehensions are far less likely today. Nevertheless, increased academic
attention (beginning with the discovery of the Nag Hammadi scriptures in 1945)
and the ensuing popular interest have produced a confusion of tongues which is
anything but helpful for the sincere inquirer into matters Gnostic. It is often
difficult even to tell what is meant by the word.
The difficulty in defining Gnosticism is not entirely of recent origin. As early as
1910, a small book was published in London that in many ways foreshadowed current trends, including the
difficulties in definition. The title of the work was Gnosticism: The Coming Apostasy; the author, a certain D.M.
Panton, was an anxious defender of Christian orthodoxy, which he felt was menaced by an emerging Gnostic
revival. Gnosticism, Panton wrote, had surfaced in the twentieth century in the forms of Theosophy, Christian
Science, some forms of spiritualism, and in what was called the "New Theology," which had been introduced
primarily by German writers on religion. (A biography of Marcion by theologian Adolf von Harnack created
much interest and controversy at that time.) While earlier crypto-Gnostics, such as Emanuel Swedenborg,
William Blake, George Fox, and Elias Hicks camouflaged their heretical beliefs, Panton argued, twentiethcentury Gnostics no longer bothered with concealment. The gnosticizing movements of the early twentieth
century, wrote Panton, were "frankly and jubilantly Gnostic"; their thought and their movements carried within
them the "throbbing heart of Gnosticism, perhaps the most dreaded foe the Christian faith ever confronted."
In some ways Panton's anti-Gnostic tirades have an advantage over much of the more recent literature, for
Panton still possessed a clear understanding of what constitutes Gnosticism. Such is not the case today. If we
contrast these early-twentieth-century analyses with some current ones, we may recognize how unclear our
understanding has become. In a European publication concerned with contemporary aspects of Gnosticism, Ioan
Culianu writes:
Once I believed that Gnosticism was a well-defined phenomenon belonging to the religious history of Late
Antiquity. Of course, I was ready to accept the idea of different prolongations of ancient Gnosis, and even that
of spontaneous generation of views of the world in which, at different times, the distinctive features of
Gnosticism occur again.
I was soon to learn however, that I was a naf indeed. Not only Gnosis was gnostic, but the Catholic authors
were gnostic, the Neoplatonic too, Reformation was gnostic, Communism was gnostic, Nazism was gnostic,
liberalism, existentialism and psychoanalysis were gnostic too, modern biology was gnostic, Blake, Yeats,
Kafka were gnostic. I learned further that science is gnostic and superstition is gnosticHegel is gnostic and
Marx is gnostic; all things and their opposite are equally gnostic.1
At least one circumstance emerges from this statement that is widely overlooked in America. In Europe
"Gnosis" and "Gnosticism" are almost always used interchangeably. The suggestion that term "gnosis" ought to
be used to describe a state of consciousness, while "Gnosticism" should denote the Gnostic system, has never

caught on. The use of such classical Gnosticism of Valentinus, Basilides, et al., persists in European literature,
including the writings of such scholars as Gilles Quispel, Kurt Rudolph, and Giovanni Filoramo (to mention
some of the most recent ones). It is true that the late Robert McLachlan put forth a proposal to use these terms
otherwise, but current usage in Europe has not followed it.
It is evident that a word used in such contradictory ways has lost its meaning. No wonder GNOSIS writer
Charles Coulombe despairs over the situation when writing recently in a Catholic publication:
In reality, "Gnosticism," like "Protestantism," is a word that has lost most of its meaning. Just as we would need
to know whether a "Protestant" writer is Calvinist, Lutheran, Anabaptist, or whatever in order to evaluate him
properly, so too the "Gnostic" must be identified.2

A Political Confusion
One of the most confusing voices comes from the discipline of political science. In his Walgreen Lectures at the
University of Chicago in 1951, migr scholar Eric Voegelin rose to the defense of what he called the "classic
and Christian tradition" against what he perceived as the "growth of Gnosticism." This opening salvo was
followed by such books as The New Science of Politics, the multivolume Order and History, and Science,
Politics, and Gnosticism. Voegelin became a prophet of a new theory of history, in which Gnosticism played a
most nefarious role. All modern totalitarian ideologies were in some way spiritually related to Gnosticism, said
Voegelin. Marxists, Nazis, and just about everybody else the good professor found reprehensible were in reality
Gnostics, engaged in "immanentizing the eschaton" by reconstituting society into a heaven on earth. Since
Gnostics did not accept the conventional Christian eschaton of heaven and hell, Voegelin concluded that they
must be engaged in a millenarian revolutionizing of earthly existence. At the same time, Voegelin was bound to
admit that the Gnostics regarded the earthly realm as generally hopeless and unredeemable. One wonders how
the unredeemable earthly kingdom could be turned into the "immanentized eschaton" of an earthly utopia. That
Voegelin's new Gnostics had no knowledge of or sympathy with historical Gnosticism did not bother him either.
Gnostics they were, and that was that.
Voegelin's confusion was made worse by a number of conservative political thinkers, mainly with Catholic
connections. Thomas Molnar, Tilo Schabert, and Steven A. McKnight followed Voegelin's theories despite their
obvious inconsistencies. In Molnar's view, Gnostics were not only responsible for all modern utopianism, but
also for the inordinate attachment of modern people to science and technology. The scientific world view, said
these folk, is in fact a Gnostic world view, and it is responsible for treating humans as machines and for making
societies into machinelike collectives.
The politicized view of Gnosticism continues to have its adherents, but these are increasingly recruited from the
lunatic fringe. Gnostics are still represented as dangerous subversives in pulp magazines and obscure conspiracy
pamphlets "exposing" Freemasons, Satanists, and other pests. Meanwhile, respectable conservative thinkers
have dropped the Gnostic issue. Some, like scholar and former U.S. Senator S.I. Hayakawa, have subjected
Voegelin and his theories to severe criticism and ridicule.

Traditionalist Difficulties
Another sometimes confusing voice comes from writers who are bent on proving that within the existing major
religions a secret tradition of gnosis may be found which is not identical to the "heretical" Gnosticism of the
early Christian centuries. In his 1947 work The Perennial Philosophy, Aldous Huxley promulgated a kind of
gnosis that was in effect a mystery reserved for elites, revealed at the dawn of history and handed down through
various religious traditions, where it still maintains itself in spite of its ostensible incompatibility with the
official dogmas of those traditions. With this view, Huxley approximated the more radical position held by
Traditionalists such as Ren Gunon and Frithjof Schuon.

Huxley, on the other hand, never passed judgment on anyone who called himself a Gnostic. One could only
wish the same could be said of other Traditionalists. Followers of Gunon (who, born a Catholic, converted to
Islam in a somewhat untraditional manner) often castigate the early Gnostic teachers in a manner reminiscent of
the more extreme ancient polemicists like Irenaeus or Tertullian. The Traditionalists' division of Gnostic writers
into "false Gnostics" and "authentic Gnostics" reflects standards that are nothing if not arbitrary; contemporary
research indicates that during the first three of four centuries A.D. there was as yet no true orthodoxy and thus
no heresy either. Instead, many opinions on religious matters, including gnosis, flourished side by side.
Certainly there were disagreements, but to arbitrarily extrapolate standards of falsity and authenticity from these
polemics does not seem justified.

Academic Ambiguities
The 1988 edition of The Nag Hammadi Library contains a lengthy afterword entitled "The Modern Relevance
of Gnosticism."3 Its author, Richard Smith, ostensibly reviews the numerous developments in Western culture
which appear to be related to Gnosticism. One would hope that here at last we might find a definition of true
Gnosticism and a list of modern writers and thinkers who might appear as its representatives. Unfortunately this
is not the case.
Smith lists a number of important figures of modern culture from the eighteenth century onward who were
sympathetic to Gnosticism. Reading this afterword, however, one gets the impression that few of these seminal
figures possessed an adequate definition of Gnosticism, and that they thus more often than not misused and
misappropriated the term. The eighteenth-century historian Edward Gibbon, for example, is accused of a
"mischievous lie" in referring to the Gnostics in complimentary terms. (Admittedly Gibbon did not share the
low esteem in which the Church Fathers held Gnostics, but does this make him a liar?) And the Gnostic and
Manichaean sympathies of Voltaire are represented as being motivated by his opposition to churchly authority.
But could the great philosoph have had other reasons for his views? It is well known that Voltaire was an
ardent Freemason, and he might have received favorable information about Gnostics through the esoteric
currents flowing in the secret fraternities of his time. Maybe he was privy to knowledge unknown to Smith.
In the same vein, Smith implies that C.G. Jung appropriated Gnosticism by turning it into psychological theory.
"Jung takes the entire dualist myth and locates it within the psyche," Smith writes.4 Personally I have devoted
the major part of my life to exploring the relationship of Jung's thought to Gnosticism, so such statements touch
a nerve.
Jung was not only interested in the Gnostics, but he considered them the discoverers and certainly the most
important forerunners of depth psychology. The association between Jung's psychology and Gnosticism is
profound, and its scope is increasingly revealed with the passage of time and the wider availability of the Nag
Hammadi scriptures. My studies have convinced me that Jung did not intend to locate the content of Gnostic
teachings in the psyche pure and simple. To say that Gnosticism is "nothing but" psychology would have
horrified Jung, for he opposed the concept of "nothing but." What made Jung's view radically different from
those of his predecessors was simply this: he believed that Gnostic teachings and myths originated in the
personal psychospiritual experience of the Gnostic sages. What originates
in the psyche bears the imprint of the psyche. Hence the close affinity
between Gnosticism and depth psychology. Jung's view may thus be called
an interpolation, but not an appropriation. The need for definitions appears
greater than ever in the light of such controversies.

Psychological and Existentialist Models

The Italian scholar Giovanni Filoramo calls attention to the fact that the
Nag Hammadi scriptures were favorably received by a wide public in part

because "certain areas of the cultural panorama showed a disposition, a peculiar sensitivity to thetexts,
which dealt with a phenomenon that they themselves had in some way helped to keep alive."5
One of the persons who kept the Gnostic phenomenon alive was C.G. Jung's close associate, the Gnostic scholar
Gilles Quispel, who labored long and hard on relating the ancient gnosis of Valentinus and other teachers to the
modern gnosis of analytical psychology. He saw the Gnostic effort as involving deep insight into the ontological
self, and thus as analogous to the best in depth psychology. Quispel's major work on the subject, Gnosis als
Weltreligion ("Gnosis as a World Religion," published in 1972), explains in detail the relationship of Jung's
model to Gnostic teachings. Quispel, like Jung himself, did not reduce Gnostic teachings to depth psychology,
but rather pointed to depth psychology as a key to understanding Gnosticism.
Another key figure in the reevaluation of ancient Gnosticism was Hans Jonas. A pupil of existentialist
philosopher Martin Heidegger in the 1930s, Jonas turned his attention to the wisdom of the Gnostics, and
discovered in them an ancient relative of existential philosophy. Existentialism's pessimism about earthly life
and high regard for experience as against theory thus found a forebear and analogue. Although critical of the
Gnostics' apparent "nihilism," Jonas was, along with Jung, one of the most important figures to bring Gnostic
teachings into modern perspective.
The linkage effected by Jung and Jonas between Gnosticism in the past and living philosophies in the present
was of crucial importance and came very close to supplying gnosis and Gnosticism with vital, living definitions.
The questions posed (and answered) by the ancient Gnostics revealed themselves now, not as outlandish and
bizarre, but as earlier discussions of issues addressed in more recent times by Freud, Jung, Kierkegaard,
Heidegger, and many others.

Toward Definition
The search for definitions is never easy, particularly in such fields as the social sciences. In these disciplines
much attention must be given to the historical context in which beliefs and actions unfold. Crucial differences
and similarities in nuance, tone, and subtleties of mood are more important here than hard and fast definitions.
The debate about Gnosticism, it would seem, turns on such nuances, and it may well be that not much can be
resolved by definitions. Nevertheless, the present chaotic conditions warrant an attempt.
In 1966, a distinguished assembly of scholars convened in Messina, Italy, for the purpose of arriving at some
useful definitions of Gnosticism. The results of this gathering were not encouraging. The scholars proposed
restricting the use of the term "Gnosticism" to certain second-century "heretical" movements, while the broader
term "gnosis" was to be used to refer to "knowledge of the divine mysteries for an elite." While a useful attempt,
it did not manage to clear up the confusion.
The difficulties in pinning down a definition of Gnosticism are intimately connected with the controversy about
its origins. Was it indeed no more than a heretical offshoot, an eccentric and aberrant branch of Christianity, or
was it the latest expression of a long, mostly hidden tradition that had existed for centuries before the Christian
era? No one has answered these questions with final authority.
To understand Gnosticism, said Hans Jonas, one needs something very much like a musical ear. Such a Gnostic
"musical ear" is not come by easily. One person who seemingly possesses it is Professor Clark Emery of the
University of Miami. In a small work on William Blake, Emery summarizes twelve points on which Gnostics
tended to agree. Nowhere in the current literature have I found anything else so concise and accurate in
describing the normative characteristics of the Gnostic mythos. Hence I shall present it here as a suggested
collection of criteria that one might apply in determining what Gnosticism is. The following characteristics may
be considered normative for all Gnostic teachers and groups in the era of classical Gnosticism; thus one who
adheres to some or all of them today might properly be called a Gnostic:

The Gnostics posited an original spiritual unity that came to be split into a plurality.

As a result of the precosmic division the universe was created. This was done by a leader possessing
inferior spiritual powers and who often resembled the Old Testament Jehovah.

A female emanation of God was involved in the cosmic creation (albeit in a much more positive role
than the leader).

In the cosmos, space and time have a malevolent character and may be personified as demonic beings
separating man from God.

For man, the universe is a vast prison. He is enslaved both by the physical laws of nature and by such
moral laws as the Mosaic code.

Mankind may be personified as Adam, who lies in the deep sleep of ignorance, his powers of spiritual
self-awareness stupefied by materiality.

Within each natural man is an "inner man," a fallen spark of the divine substance. Since this exists in
each man, we have the possibility of awakening from our stupefaction.

What effects the awakening is not obedience, faith, or good works, but knowledge.

Before the awakening, men undergo troubled dreams.

Man does not attain the knowledge that awakens him from these dreams by cognition but through
revelatory experience, and this knowledge is not information but a modification of the sensate being.

The awakening (i.e., the salvation) of any individual is a cosmic event.

Since the effort is to restore the wholeness and unity of the Godhead, active rebellion against the moral
law of the Old Testament is enjoined upon every man.6

The noted sociologist Max Weber wrote in his book The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism that "the
perfect conceptual definition cannot stand at the beginning, but must be left until the end of the inquiry." That is
what we have done in the present inquiry also. Emery's twelve points are in every consistent with the proposal
set out by the colloquium at Messina. Second-century Gnosticism is taken as the principal model for all of these
definitions, a practice that appears to be sensible. Nor is any separate recognition given to any so-called
"orthodox gnosis" that is occasionally alluded to, more as a figure of speech than as any discernible historical
phenomenon, in the writings of some of the Church Fathers who were contemporaneous with the Gnostics. It
would seem that whatever is excluded by Emery's definitions and the protocol of Messina may be more
profitably considered from doctrinal perspectives other than Gnostic.
Whatever the value of this line of inquiry, at least it calls attention to definitions that are historically
unimpeachable and terminologically definite. This is much more than the current literature - especially of the
semipopular variety - possesses. Divisive categorizations that separate "false Gnostics" from "authentic
Gnostics," especially on the basis of orthodoxies which were never relevant to either Gnosticism or the
Gnostics, may have to be discarded in the light of such definitions. The random projection of contemporary fads
and enthusiasms (such as feminism and the Gaia hypothesis) onto Gnosticism might also have to be controlled.
But all of this seems like a small price to pay for some order and clarity in this field. We might have to take to
heart the ironic admonition of Alice in Wonderland:

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said,"it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

The article first appeared in Gnosis: A Journal of Western Inner Traditions (Vol. 23, Spring 1992),
and is reproduced here by permission of the author.
Notes

1. Ioan P. Culianu, "The Gnostic Revenge: Gnosticism and Romantic Literature," in Gnosis und Politik, Jacob Taubes, ed.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

(Munich: W. Fink, 1984), p. 290; quoted in Arthur Versluis, "'Gnosticism,' Ancient and Modern," in Alexandria 1 (1991), pp.
307-08.
Charles A. Coulombe, "Solovyev: Gnostic or Orthodox?", New Oxford Review, November 1991, pp. 28-29.
Richard Smith, "The Modern Relevance of Gnosticism," in James M. Robinson, ed., The Nag Hammadi Library, third edition
(San Francisco, Harper & Row, 1988), pp. 532-49.
Ibid., pp. 540-41.
Giovanni Filoramo, A History of Gnosticism (Cambridge, Mass.: Basil Blackwell, 1990) p. xiv.
Clark Emery, William Blake: The Book of Urizen (Coral Gables, Fla.: University of Miami Press, 1966), pp. 13-14.

Gnosis Archive | Library | Bookstore | Index | Web Lectures | Ecclesia Gnostica | Gnostic Society

BASILIDES
Were I to persuade anyone that the real soul is not a unit, but that the passions of the
erring are occasioned by the compulsion of the accreted natures, no common excuse then
would the worthless of mankind have for saying, 'I was compelled, I was carried away, I did
it without wishing to do so, I acted unwillingly'; whereas it was the man himself who led his
desire towards evil and refused to battle with the constraints of the accretions. Our duty is to
show ourselves rulers over the inferior creation within us, gaining mastery by means of the
rational principle.
Concerning the Overgrown Soul

ISIDOROS

Within the whirling vortex of Alexandrian intellectual life, philosophies

and movements sprang up and sank, carrying myriad forgotten figures with
them. In the sombre times which Hesiod called the Age of Iron and the Age
of Zeus, encompassing the whole of recorded history, every renaissance
seems to emerge in a context of psychological decline, moral decay and
social disintegration. Souls risk a great deal in times when the spiritual stakes
are high, for just as doors are opened, one finds that one cannot avoid
choosing whether to pass through them or to remain outside. Alexandria in
the second and third centuries was the centre of a renaissance in which
ancient traditions, creative thought and pellucid insight fused alchemically in
a diversity of noble perspectives, each with its own firm commitments,
intense faith and exacting way of life.
Out of this seminal stream of ideation would arise the neo-Platonic
universalism of Ammonius Saccas and the Christian application of his
student Origen. The tributaries to that fluorescent river included the world's
philosophies and religions classical Greek and Iranian spirituality, Buddhist
and Hebrew teachings, the School of Pythagoras and the mysteries of ZeusAmmon, as well as earlier Egyptian magic. Perhaps it is not surprising that
Christianity, whose founder had lived in Egypt as a youth and whose heritage
included Joseph's journey to Egypt and the exodus of Moses, should find its
deep well-spring in the land of Khem. Gnostic Christianity, as if returning to
its true source, found a warm welcome and fertile ground along the Nile.
Jesus declared that he had an exoteric teaching for the multitudes. Cast
largely in parables and in seeds for meditation, it would lead the intuitive
individual to a deeper understanding of "the way, the truth and the life". For
those prepared to sacrifice everything to Christ on the throne of the Kingdom
of Heaven within each human heart, Jesus gave the esoteric teaching which
could not be conveyed to those unprepared to understand it. These initiated
disciples constituted what Elaine Pagels has called "the initiation church",
which was governed by silence and secrecy, girded by the inward
illumination which gives gnosis, self-validating spiritual knowledge, and
aims at the universal enlightenment of humanity. Renouncing all concern
with public recognition, prestige and external organization, this church
recognized several teachers and a rich diversity of expressions, under the
aegis of the authentic tradition, for the sake of transmitting the pristine light

of gnosis to courageous disciples ready to seek the Christos in their inmost

consciousness. Amongst the brightest luminaries of the second century is
Basilides, whose cosmogony supported the subtlest ethics and inspired
disciples for three centuries.
The life of Basilides left no discernible track in history or legend, though
the line of spiritual teachers from which he descended is known. Simon
Magus, a Samaritan whose enigmatic teachings were replete with a rare
luminosity, was singled out by the early church as its chief enemy. His
foremost disciple and fellow Samaritan, Menander, "also attained the
pinnacle of the magical art", according to Irenaeus. His authentic magic or
soul-wisdom promised self-conscious immortality to those who could pass
through the spiritual baptism which washes away attachment to every angel
and principality below the unknowable First Power. Menander in turn had
two chief disciples, Satornilos of Antioch and Basilides of Alexandria.
Tradition holds that Basilides was Alexandrian by birth, and though for a
time he was said to have "preached amongst the Persians", he consecrated the
whole of his life to teaching in his home city, most probably around AD. 130.
Unlike his near contemporary and fellow Alexandrian, Valentinos, Basilides
did not found a school of disciples, preferring to teach and advise those who
came to him from every quarter. His only identifiable disciple was his son
Isidoros, whose Ethika contained the ethical elaboration of his father's
metaphysics. The teachings of Basilides survive through the unsympathetic
eyes of two self-appointed heresiologists, Irenaeus, who freely invents where
he cannot distort, and Hippolytus, who is honest, if selective, with his
information.
Basilides taught that in the beginning Nothing was, "simply nothing,
without any mental reservations or sophistry". According to Hippolytus,
When I say 'was', I do not mean that it was, but to express what I want to indicate, I would
say that nothing at all was. What is so termed is not absolutely inexpressible: we call it
'inexpressible' but it is not even inexpressible. It is superior to any name that can be named.

This ultimate origin which has no name and can receive no predicates is
beyond matter and being, beyond being and non-being, and is referred to
only in the denial of opposites. As a kind of shorthand for an indefinitely
long list of negations, Basilides called this utterly transcendental Absolute
'Unbeing'. Whilst nothing can be said of Unbeing, since It does not will, think
or perceive, and whilst Its relation to the manifest cosmos is lost in the
mystery of total negation, the apex where highest noetic thought encounters
emptiness, Basilides says that It 'felt' like creating the world. This feeling is
akin to the equally imponderable desire in the striking verse of the Rig Veda:
"Desire first arose in It."
Out of this quite unthinkable process, the seed of Cosmos arose, like the
point in a circle. This noumenal seed contained in potentia all that would
subsequently unfold from it, just as a mustard seed contains not only roots,
trunk, branches and leaves, but also the seeds of all future generations of the
plant. Within this divine seed at the most metaphysical level, a "threefold
filiation" or sonship existed. One part consists of supremely refined particles,

the second of grosser particles and the third of particles which require
purification, the three together composing a kind of Monadic stream which
subdivides with the elaboration of the world and which constitutes that
unfoldment. The most refined filiation at once rushed to reunite with
Unbeing. Since the threefold filiation is consubstantial with every manifest
being, though varying in proportion and degree, all beings naturally yearn for
Unbeing as That which lies beyond "superabundant beauty and grace". The
grosser filiation was like a wingless bird, unable to rise on its own. To gain
wings, the second sonship practised good deeds and benefitted from them,
diffusing a profound spirit of goodwill throughout the cosmos. This hagion
pneuma, sacred breath or holy spirit, lifted the second filiation towards
Unbeing, for the sonship needed this breath to rise and the breath depended
on the filiation to be stirred.
The third filiation remained in the husk of the seed, where it purified itself
through doing good deeds and benefitting from them. The ascent of the first
filiation directly to Unbeing provided the channel for all subsequent ascents.
The second sonship followed, but wings can carry a bird no higher than the
density of air permits. So this filiation rose to that point of sublime
rarefaction where it must hover on its wings of divine breath, marking the
division between this world and the World Above, signifying that interface
between celestial and supercelestial reality figured in the canopy of the fixed
stars. Thus were laid the noumenal foundations of the world.
Out of the seminal abundance of the cosmic seed which remained to be
purified, the great Archon burst forth, "of unutterable beauty, greatness and
strength". Wiser, more powerful and more transcendent than anything in the
world, save only the purest potential of the remaining filiation, the great
Archon was nevertheless ignorant of everything beyond the sacred pneuma.
As Lord, Commander and wise Architect, the great Archon began to create
the world in detail. From the numinous materials already present, he first
created a Son wiser and more magnificent than himself. Marvelling at this
creation and unaware that he only reduplicated in his own mighty sphere the
process which had given rise to Cosmos itself, he placed his Son in the
superior position on his right hand. Together they completed the whole
etheric creation, the realm called Ogdoas, the Eighth, after the eighth sphere
of the fixed stars. Within the finished etheric creation, a second Archon arose
out of the abundance of the seed, also magnificent in every way though less
so than the great Archon. Basilides warned,
The names we use are not sufficient even for the universe, so diversified is it; they fall
short.

Thus, only the second Archon can be expressed in language. Everything

ontologically prior to his appearance is beyond discursive thought. The
second Archon abides in the Hebdomas, the Seventh, the seat of the manifest
world as symbolized in the seven sacred planets. He, too, created a Son wiser
than himself, and together they manifested the world which encompasses the
seminal potency of the third filiation. Thus was cosmogenesis completed.
This creative ontogenetic hierarchy is possible because the three principles

of activity periodicity of space and time, quality, and mode of creation

depend on no Demiurge or embodied intelligence but are part of the original
triune seed. For Basilides, this vast panorama of cosmic unfoldment is the
backdrop for the historical drama of humanity, itself a repetition of
metaphysical and sempiternal events cast onto the refracting lens of time.
The third filiation yearned to rise as is its nature, but unlike the first and
second, its impurity prevented it from doing so. Just as Anthropos is, for the
disciples of Hermes Trismegistus, the archetype of both incarnated man and
order in nature, and as Adam Kadmon, the Heavenly Man of the Kabbalah, is
the paradigm of the soul-powers of man and intelligence in the hierarchies of
nature, so the third filiation of Basilidean doctrine is the soul in man and the
natural world. To overcome the impurity which constitutes ignorance in the
manifested world, even as the Archons are ignorant of what is above their
worlds, something must break into and light up the tellurian darkness. Until
this illumination occurred, the Archon of the Ogdoas seemed to be King and
Lord of All. This is why, according to Basilides, the Archon of the Hebdomas
spoke in Exodus, saying: "I am the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and I
have not revealed the name of God unto them." In his Epistle to the Romans,
Paul had written: "For creation itself groaneth and travailleth awaiting the
manifestation of the sons of God." These sons of God manifest when they
become gnostics, beings aware of Truth, true pneumatics filled with divine
breath, able to bring ignorant souls into the divine order and set them on the
road to perfection.
To effect the purification and enlightenment of incarnated humanity, who
collectively constitute with nature the third filiation, the Gospel came into the
world, descending through each sphere and realm.
It came in reality, though nothing came down from above, for the blessed filiation did not
part from the incomprehensible and blessed Unbeing. Rather, as Indian naphtha catches fire
from a great distance when flame appears, so the powers force their way up to the filiation
from the shapelessness of the swarm below.

Like one candle lighting the next, and so on from candle to candle, the fire of
supernal wisdom passed from sphere to sphere down to humanity. The
Gospel passed first to the Son of Ogdoas, who informed his father, the great
Archon. The great Archon trembled at his previous innocent ignorance, and
this is the meaning of the Psalmist's words: "The fear of the Lord is the
beginning of Wisdom." Repenting his former ignorance, the great Archon
followed the guidance of his Son, and the entire Ogdoas was filled with the
blazing light of gnosis. Then the great Archon's Son communicated the same
Mystery to the Son of the second Archon, whose realm is the Hebdomas, and
the same process of enlightenment recurred.
Here the fiery Gospel spread throughout the creation of Hebdomas, which
consists of three hundred and sixty-five heavens, each with its hierarchy and
its archon, signified by the number of days in the terrestrial year. When the
number of sacred planets, seven, is divided into the days of the year, three
hundred and sixty-five, the result is fifty-two, the number of weeks in the
year, with one remaining to represent the second Archon who presides over
and knits together the whole Hebdomas. As the thread which binds the

manifold heavens into one hebdomadic sphere, the second Archon spirals
through them as Abrasax or Abraxas, whose name is 365. (In Greek
alphanumerology A = 1, B = 2, R = 100, A = 1, S = 200, A = 1, X = 60,
totalling 365.) Just as the Ogdoas was universally enlightened from the great
Archon through his Son, and the Hebdomas was also enlightened in the same
way, so the manifested world in which the third filiation continues to abide is
enlightened by Jesus, the son of Mary.
From the Hebdomas now the light came, which had come down from the Ogdoas above to
the Son of the Hebdomas, to Jesus, Son of Mary, and he was enlightened and caught up
wholly in the Light which shone out in him.

Thus Basilides explained the words in the Gospel According to Luke: "The
Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall
overshadow thee." The Gospel passed through the thread Abrasax into the
world of men.
Jesus, a man who received the Light without reservation or rebellion, is
illumined with the Wisdom of the World Above, and in this sense he is Soter,
the saviour of humanity. Ours is the long epoch in which the Light is
gradually communicated to every corner of the globe. The pneumatics, those
who have been awakened by the fire of gnosis, do not follow Jesus out of this
world in a rush for personal salvation, any more than the Archons abandoned
their spheres when they discovered the truth. Rather, these self-selected elect
remain in the world to aid the whole of humanity to fulfil its natural yearning
for the unknowable Unbeing. The world shall continue unfolding itself until
the entire third filiation, composed of particles or sparks in human beings, is
constituted a single whole. This resplendent unity is the self-conscious
brotherhood of humanity and its brotherhood with nature. Once recognized in
the deepest awareness of human beings, the third filiation will truly follow
Jesus through the channel Abrasax, through the Hebdomas, through the
Ogdoas, and burst across the boundary line of the Holy Spirit, carrying the
second filiation which has remained there as a beckoning threshold into
ineffable union with and dissolution in Unbeing, a condition beyond any
appellation, description or symbolic signification.
When the second filiation is released by the redemption of the third, it
leaves behind the sacred breath, hagion pneuma, as an abandoned psychic
vehicle, just as the third filiation pneumatic or spiritual man abandons its
psychic vesture in its ascent to the Divine Unknowable. Unfortunately, at this
point even the straightforward Hippolytus cannot understand the teachings he
was anxious to find heretical. His garbled account suggests that Basilides
taught that the holy breath which marked the boundary between the world
and the World Above will settle into the psychic vesture of the liberated third
filiation, ready to repeat the grand cosmic drama but one phase further along
in evolution. When this happens, a great Ignorance covers all that is immortal
but incapable of transcendence, and the cosmos sinks into a profound sleep.
Perhaps this is the Pralaya of the Hindus, and perhaps it suggests a sleep
after which an awakening dawn of cosmic activity follows.
The Gospel is knowledge of the World Above. When the great Archon of

the Ogdoas learnt it, he "rejoiced and was exceeding glad", in the words of
the Gospel According to Matthew. This joy is the 'good news' which was
communicated from sphere to sphere until Jesus offered it to humanity.
Infusion of the Christos-light into the formless world of ignorance brought
spiritual order to nature and humanity. Thus the Christos is called Caulacau,
a gnostic term derived from an obscure line in Isaiah, "qaw la qaw ' meaning
'precept upon precept'. The spiritual and ethical order found in the teachings
of Jesus constitutes the pneumatic awakening of humanity to its true nature,
history, inheritance and destiny. For Basilides, all salvation is universal, and
redemption is nothing other than recovery from initial ignorance. This
purifying enlightenment is gnosis, ultimate knowledge, but it shows in every
human being who actively shares in it as ethical consciousness. Whilst
pneumatics or gnostics may find man-made laws irrelevant and laughable, it
is only because they have found within themselves a moral integrity so
profound that it is the pure mirror of spiritual sight.
Isidoros, the son of Basilides, wrote that human beings have needs that are
both necessary and natural, and fulfilling them is a condition of existence in
the terrestrial realm, a product of the ignorance of the third filiation as it
pervades nature. Other human needs are natural but not necessary, and in
discerning these the human mind begins to awaken to its inherent ethical
awareness. Thus one who says, "I do not desire to do wrong", but thinks only
on the wrongdoing, refrains from error only from fear of external
punishment. There is nothing righteous, nothing partaking of gnosis, in this
standpoint. As surely as moral laxity, this stance allows accretions to collect
on the metaphysically simple soul. The soul which is overgrown with
accretions blocks itself from the radiant vibration of the Light and isolates
itself from participation in the brotherhood of humanity. Blind allegiance to
regulations will not help: ethical mastery comes from the moral awareness of
a spiritually alert mind, and this means getting to the core of oneself and of
nature with the use of noetic reason. When one does this, the radiance of the
Light within meets the greater consubstantial Light without, and all
accretions are burnt away. When the Christos-light is released, it naturally
and invariably joins with the Christos, just as the stream returns to the ocean;
and as the ray to its luminary, the soul returns to its unknown and everunknowable Source.
Basilides taught truths that frightened worldly-minded churchmen, for he
held that Jesus was not an instrument for creeds and institutions, but rather
the representative of that in men and women which transcends the laws of
this world, the worlds themselves, soaring beyond history and cosmogony,
beyond space and time, one with the One which has no Name. So powerful
was his message that despite the fact he founded no school, and despite the
unflagging efforts of the church to destroy every vestige of his teaching,
disciples followed the way he showed for three hundred years, and even as
orthodox Christianity passed its first millennium, one could still hear in
hushed whispers the name 'Basilides'.

The policy of conquerors, the potency of kings,

The great unbroken silence in learning's secret things;

The lore of all the learned, the seed of all which springs.
Living or lifeless, still or stirred, whatever beings be,
None of them is in all the worlds, but it exists by Me!
SHRI KRISHNA

OM

Copyright 2000 Theosophy Library Online

[Theosophy Library Online Homepage]

[Library] [Search] [Biographies] [Contact TLO]
[

HERMES Magazine - Lead Articles 1975-1989

[The Jewel in the Lotus Home Page]
[Subscribe to Daily Readings from The Jewel]

Main >> Cultures & Beliefs >>

Christianity

Search | Help

The True Story Of Jesus

Information is compiled by Minister Paul E Jones
copyrighted through TruGospel's Ministries

You are about to take a journey like you have

never been before.
What will be written here
will shake religious foundations.
Even Jesus made the statement,
Ye shall know the truth,
and the truth will set you free.
Jesus The Christ, Who was He, and what was His Message
Written by Minister Paul E. Jones
copyright is secured by TruGospel's Ministries
Through out history, noone has influenced society like Jesus has. There are religions that claim that He is their
Lord and Savior. Others say that He was just a man. Still others say that He is a fake and a fraud. Still, He has a
meaning to all who would receive His messages. In this first part of a 10 part series. I will take you to a place in
time, where only the truth will survive.
Chapter One of The True Story Of Jesus
Part 1
THE COMMON DOGMATIC LIMITS have made people indoctrinated, brainwashed and against free scientific
questioning. Jesus, Moses, Buddha, Mohammed and all true prophets have given both childlike faith with
parables and secrets of heaven. Such hidden divine timeless wisdom, "Gnosis of Agape" is still to be found in
all religions though veiled and obscured. "We are entrusted with the mysteries of God" (1 Cor 4:1, Matt 16:19,
Luk 11:52). But we have to use parables for the secrets.
"YOU ARE GODS". That is one "secret" in the Old Testament. "CHRIST IN YOU" is the same "secret" in the
New Testament. (Col 1:27). The hidden eternal nature of man and of everything is mentioned as a secret in all
religions. In eastern languages: Tao, Atma, Krishna, the eternal Buddha-nature. Compare even what science
says about "sacral king"-parables. Be free to contemplate your inner nature as "personal, impersonal, male,
female, monistic, dualistic" etc.

CHRIST is a word with many meanings: our inner all-one-nature, an incarnation of a divine aspect, a prophet.
Christ is believed by some to be of the same substance as the "Father". Some believe that we are all of the same
eternal substance. Some believe that Jesus is just an older soul or as an older brother. We do inspire free
seeking, knowing that there are many "keys". (Matt 16.19).
THE MOTHER OF GOD is another secret . We contemplate freely if St. Mary is just the human mother of
Jesus? Or if she is even a symbol or representative of a heavenly Mother. Is she just an elder soul, a heavenly
helping sister or saint? Jesus says in the Gospel according to the Hebrews: "My mother the Holy Ghost..." That
is a typical gnostic expression.
SAINTS in the sense more perfect souls are mentioned in all religions and can inspire us even if many are partly
fancied. We recommend you to study and compare them with heart and head. THE TRUE PROPHETS are
saints of God. Jesus could not among the Jews of his time openly say that all religions are from the same God
though veiled and misunderstood. Christ does not abolish prophets of any religion (Matt 7:12). He mentions the
same "law" in all religions (Matt 7:12): "Do to others what you would have them to do for you". In this new age
we do talk with parables from all true religions and we shall slowly get "UNITED RELIGIONS" among those
most illuminated. In this new age we begin to read even during the public divine services the gospels of both
Christ, Moses and Buddha, Lao-tse, Mohamed etc. In Bhagavad Gita we read how Krishna speaks about
reincarnation: "as a man casts off a worn-out garment and entereth a new". We do freely speak about life before
and after the death of the body, about resurrection through real reincarnation here and about spiritual
resurrection in higher consciousness.
"FALLEN ANGELS" are according to one parable-key just our reincarnating souls. Before "creation" we live in
the eternal (Eph 1: 4). In the beginning of time we live in a heavenly world "when the morning stars sing
together and all the sons of God shout for joy (Job 38:7). Down here God and we are later wested in light and
darkness (Isaiah 45:7). The opposites give resistance which helps us to manifest our divine qualities. In a
parable it is said that an angel wrestles with Jacob and blesses him (Genesis 32:24). In an other parable it is said
that Baalam is hindered by an angel with a sword . That saves him. (Numbers 22:23). Angels are also said to
give inspiration for holy scriptures in the religions. But even the words of holy angels and scriptures are limited.
Books are called infallible but are full of limited words. Childlike letter-faith is a beginning in religious life. But
we must recommend the seekers to question the letter, translations and interpretations. Many "keys" ought to be
tried (Matt 16:19, Luk 11:52, 2 Cor 4:3)
GNOSIS is mentioned in the Septuaginta-bible: Isaiah 11:9, Hosea 6,6 , Job 33,16 and by S:t Paul. But how
many can understand higher gnosis? Jesus gives to Simon the title "Peter" which means interpreter of secret
gnostic truth."ON THE ROCK of truth shall religion be built" says Jesus to Simon who has understood a
TRUTH about Messias. And in some mysteries the "Peter" is sitting on a symbolic rock but in vain if not the
infallible Spirit talks through such a Peter (Proverb 29:18, John 16:13, 1 Cor 2:10).
WORSHIP IN SPIRIT AND TRUTH says Jesus. But many prayers are unspiritual egoistic PETITIONS that
God shall change and give more. Areopagita, "the father of Christian mysticism" tried to make people pray with
AFFIRMATIVE contemplation. And our Free Catholic Eucharist and other services are affirmative. Try them.
When Jesus prayed with words it was not with petition. His Hebraic language had undefinable tense. His
AGAPE-teaching ought to inspire all to interpret in an affirmative way: "Father, you give bread, you do
forgive..." MYSTICISM do we heir from Areopagita, Eckehardt, the Gnostic gospels of Thomas and Pistis
Sophia. But in this more free age we can even openly recommend comparisons with mysticism from other
prophetic religions. Eastern YOGA is not always dangerous but sometimes high and healthy. RITUAL
mysticism does inspire many. Processions from the outer world to the temple and altar is common at Christian

services. We may compare the legend about the exodus of MOSES which is foremost ritual. Moses was initiated
in the Egyptian mysteries where there were exodus-processions from the outer world to the inner temple which
represented the promised spiritual land. (The acts 7 22) We find equal exodus-processions in the later Israeli
religion. But is has been believed to be foremost an outer historic exodus.
Science can tell us more exodus-rituals. Even psychoanalytic research about exodus-dreams and exodus-visions
are illuminating. C G Jung was both scientist and Gnostic of our type and his "Gnostic sermons to the dead" is a
good education about our exodus from matter to spirit. . ART may for many be an equal help to experience a
spiritual exodus. For some it is enough with a beautiful bysantic icon to experience how an inner eye can open
and let us watch something of the promised inner land.
Maybe he was a different , maybe he wasn't. What everyone needs to understand is the fact that we are "all"
children of a creator of some sort or another. As to him being God, well, from a metaphysical aspect, we are all
Gods, Jesus even makes that statement in the NT. What he doesn't say is that we are "the God, the supreme
creator it'self." As for Jesus being a King, well, if he is regulated to that position, it would have to be spiritually
only. The reason is very simple. Mary his mother visited her cousin, Elizabeth. Elizabeth was a Cohan, making
Mary a Cohan, descended from Aaron. The christian community has attempted to place her genealogy with
Nathan, the brother of Solomon. Yes, blood wise, she is descended from Nathan, but to the Jewish people, the
lineage of Tribal descent only descends through the male line. In Luke, he has brought her down through two
females descended from the Tribe of Judah. So, unless Joseph was his real father, Yoshua, which was his real
name at the time, was not descended from the House of David, which was of the Tribe of Judah. Secondly, if
Joseph was his father, he still could not have been recognized as the legal heir to the throne of David for the
simple reason that the prophet Jerimiah (sp) in the book of Jerimiah, chapter 22, verse's 28-30 places a curse
upon the house of David, wherein no one from that time forward, that would be descended from the house of
David would ever sit upon the throne of Judah ever again. Therefore, the only way he would/could have been a
King in anyway was strictly in the spiritual sense and that places it into the arena of pure faith.
Hybrid/Hybred whatever, maybe he was an alien, maybe a time traveler, who knows, but one thing does need to
be recognized, he was taller than most men; he could heal others where no one else could do so; he seems,
according to the Bible, to have been very well taught, especially since he came from the northern part of Israel,
which was looked upon as an area of ignorance. Yes,
he was special. Yes, he was a great teacher. Was he the son of God, man, space alien, who knows. Just some
thoughts to think about.
I totally agree with with most on this. I couldn't believe it when I read many theories on Jesus. It is exactly the
same as mine. Mary being implanted with Jesus as she did not have intercourse to get pregnant. Is it also
possible the Star of Bethlehem was a UFO as it led the Wise Men to the baby Jesus after he was born? UFO's
are even mentioned in the bible in Ezekial chapter ten. Angels where often described as ascending and
descending the heavens in great balls of fire. And what about the period when Jesus is absent from the bible,
supposedly spreading his word around the world. How would he have done it way back then? Even the number
twelve has great significance in almost every religion from Egyptian, to Christianity, to Sumerian, even to
Greek Mythology. There was the twelve apostles, the main Greek gods were in a group of twelve, the twelve
olden ones in Sumerian religion, even to the mysterious MJ-12 in recent American history. How could religions
with no way of contacting eachother in early times share the same religous history? What is the significance of
this number? The ancient Sumerians and East Indians continually talked of their gods arriving in rockets in
ancient writings. Why do we pass this up as folklore and legends and not take the meanings at face value? Even
a painting of the Madonna has a man in the background pointing up and looking at a UFO. Are you to tell me
this is only a legend, even if you believe in the Madonna? Could it be we were really worshipping Aliens all this
time. What would be the consequences if people found this out. Total chaos most likely. Any comments would

be most welcome, especially from you Blackzane.

Well, the bible was written as an organic document where it can be view with many interpertation's as is any
great document of it's sort (i.e. US Constitution). For the devoted follower's of christianity all I have to say is
you do not follow the same interpertation's of the bible as people a thousand years did, even just a few hundred
year's ago the interpertation's of the "True One and Only Christian Believers" were different. Please forgive my
hostility, but the bible was meant to be interperted many ways and it's not as much what it says or how it says it,
but the message that it tries to get across to the reader. The bible is a set of morals and rules for a more peaceful
life.. it isn't suprising that it could be interperted with Alien's and Hybrid's, it was meant to be able to do that,
and that is how come it has survived through so many generations of thoughts and beliefs.
Now let's not go over the deep end here...Let's consider a possibility. Let's say for the heck of it that Jesus was a
time traveling alien, sent by God who took the form of a human. His message and all that he stood for is still
there for humanity to learn and live by. Why not? Isn't the purpose of aliens coming to earth now so that they
can help us? Wel, back then, the world was in a mess and someone came to our aid. Could it be that we are
about to have another "heavenly visitor" soon but this time, not human form but of the true form of an alien? By
the way, I was raised Baptist, but still have my opinions. I think God went elsewhere after the Adam and Eve
thing and built another civilization that was more to his perfection, thus the aliens. Now they come to visit us.
I'm new to this area, but this subject has been haunting me for years. I have some conclusions. In the Bible (not
to get "religious") we see various alien encounters. We see in the Eden story that "gods" formed man, obviously
with some sort of DNA cloning, and thus starting the races that emanated from the Mid East 6k years ago. At
the beginning of Gen 6, we see that aliens had intercourse with women, and the result were "mighty men".
Abraham used to chat with them, especially on the plain of Mamre. Jacob fought with one. The Israelites in the
desert saw a huge UFO, and regarded it in their ignorance as a "pillar of cloud" (dust generated by the engines)
by day, and a "pillar of fire" (the internal lights) by night. Ezekiel also talked with one.
Jesus, was a product (like in Gen 6) of an alien father and Mary. Jesus prayed to the "father", and went back to
be a member of the Order of Melchisedec (Heb 6). Since He said, in his last supper, that he came from "there"
and would return to "there", he had to join the Melchiseded group after He was "beamed up" in Acts 1. Since
Melchisedec is the head of the order of alien priests (he also visited the Earth and chatted to Abraham), it
follows that Melchisedec is the father of Jesus.
There's nothing so strange about aliens consorting with humans. It's been done for thousands of years and has
worked out OK, with the offspring being a little "bigger than life".
When the aliens cloned our DNA (as with other races earlier), the biology of interalienlife intercourse would be
no problem. After all, didn't they say that we were made in "their image and likeness."
This would also make sense as to the second comming of Christ and the predicted Alien contact that is supposed
to happen at the end of the century!
Look at Noah's Ark! This was an Alien made craft to support life thru Earth Changes that were occurring at that
time. The dimensions of this thing were huge! The bible said that Noah was a drunk, so when did he find the
time to design and build this huge ship???
Maybe aliens are not so different from us so Jesus is who he is but might be related to aliens the same as he is
related to us except for the message he was giving.
The Book of Enoch mentioned Gods and Goddesses that traveled the universe in space-ships some of them
came to Earth, some of their names were Apollo, Thor, Osiris, etc...they were angels and they were not the

Creator of the Universe, but Enoch said it was a genetic cross breeding between them and the first hominidprimates that produced modern man(Homo-sapiens).
Has anyone ever heard of the book of Enoch, which means Sky, Earth and Spirit from the first language of the
earth much older than sanskrit.
Enoch mysteries contains much information in it that has proven to be true, example; Enoch said that the Earth
has a invisible vortex around it, and that the vortex was comet shaped. The vortex was 42,000 miles broad from
the surface of the earth with variations, the tail of the vortex streches somewhat beyond the moon. Enoch said
that magnetism was one of the manifestations of the vortex.
In 1958 when the U.S. first sent up space satellites scientist discovered the invisible magnetosphere of the Earth.
They discovered that the magnetosphere was comet shaped and that it was aprox. 40,365 miles from the surface
of the earth to the nose which fluctuates. Scientist also discovered the magnetotail streched well beyond the
moon. The magnetosphere was first theorized in 1931, but OAHSPE had that information 1n 1881(original
manuscript before publishing).
Enoch also said that the preeceeding substance of the living is se'mu, and that among nebula in places there is
se'mu. In 1978 scientist first discovered DNA-protein molecules in Nebula.
Enoch aslo prophesied the modern day world-wide Olympic games(first in 1996), and the meeting of nations in
North America(United Nations-1945) and that it would fail to keep peace.
Enoch prophesies the end of the world and the evidence that it is coming true.
Enoch also prophesies the end of the false religions of the world, and the Creators's kingdom on Earth.
Enoch was prophesied in the BOOK OF REVELATIONS 2:17 in the Bible, interpretation; The man who typed
Enoch under the guidence and inspiration of the Spirit had to overcome a ten year test of purification(diet,
purifying mind, helping others), then he was given the hidden man-na(knowledge), a white stone(the white
pages with type on it), in the stone a new name(a new Bible with a new name), which no man knoweth saving
he that recieveth it(no man at that time knew the name O-AH-SPE, and the book had/has hidden manna or
knowledge-spiritual food that has proven to be true). That whole verse in Revelations 2:17 is symbolic as much
of the Bible is.
I believe completely in aliens, or terrestrial impaired, and think that the theory that Jesus might have been an
alien is actually a good one. It would explain more than just saying Jesus was a man. I also believe that many of
the earlier cultures were founded by aliens. Take ancient Greece, for example. There were so many more
genuises there than there are in today's world. What other explanation could there be for that than that these
people were the offspring of intelligent aliens. Also, in reference to the Great Pyramids, they were probably at
least partially, if not fully, constructed by alien life forms. It's not blasphemous to think that maybe God isn't as
we know him. Maybe he's a greater power than we've ever imagined, and has created billions of worlds all over
the universe. If he did that, than why wouldn't it be imaginable that some other world developed faster and
better than us, and visited? Ponder that one for a while. Any responses (serious ones) would be appreciated.
First , the Virgin birth is metaphor, not reality. Just as Buddha and other religious figures are of Virgin birth to
indicate purity, uniqueness and spirituality. The Virgin birth of Christ was in many ways in response to he Virgin
birth claims of Augustus Caesar, the ruler of that era. In fact let's review the similarities: Mary stood in the light
of Angels, Augustus' mother stood in the shadow of the Statue of Apollo. Both "fathers" were visited and told of
the upcoming births. This is metaphor and legend folks, not fundamentalist fact.

If you believe the writings 0f the Word of God (theBible); than you must believe in a Rapture or the ascension
(or taking away) that is to come in history. The bible also talks about the (Big Lie) that is to be propogated at
this time. There will come a time when a whole lot of people in this world will just disappear. The ones left here
will have to get some type of explanation as to what happened to these people. I believe that Aliens (fallin
angels) will come on the scene at this time and tell the world they had to get rid of the narrow minded religious
christians in order for us as a epople and race of man to evolve into our next stage. And if this theory is true,
than just think of the power these beings will have. We would be at their mercy, how could we possibly fight
against such awsome beings? They could tell us anything and we'd have no choice but to believe them. We all
tend to take for granted somthing about (aliens).....we wouldn't really have a say in anything, their knowledge
and wisdom of the Universe would far outwiegh ours. The mark of the beast; the worship of their God; The
trouble that would come from those who won't conform (those whom will go through the tribulation). People
will hate christians and will turn them to the authorities.Christians will be blamed for all our troubles and hated
around the world! (personal-opinion) : )
The book Enoch says there are many false gods(angels) in the lower atmospherean heavens of the Earth that
claims to be Jesus or the true Christ each one representing a denomination on earth, such as Baptist, methodist,
presbyterian, Catholic, lutherian, shakers, swedenborg, mormon etc.. What if Christianity itself was founded by
a false god (angel) in order to decieve or control mankind, when a mortal Christian died, his spirit fell into
his(the false god's-angels's) kingdom and became a servant. Each false god or Christ claiming to be the true
Christ just as their mortal followers claimed to follow the true Christ. Each false god or Christ seeking to
enlarge his own heavenly kingdom with the help of his own angelic hosts inspired his mortal followers and
believes to spread his doctrines and dogma and make converts by force (the sword) if nescessary, including in
his earthly book "I did not come to bring peace but a sword", and it was christians who came to America and
destroyed the American Indians who worshipped the Great Spirit (not Christ) and used froce to make converts
of them to Christianity. It was christians who went into to Hawaii and Polynesia who took over the lands and
culture of those who did not worship Christ made converts of them to Christianity also by force. It was
Christians who justified slavery in the United States and took African natives who were not christians from
Africa and forced them into servitued and converted them to Christainity. It was Christians from Britain who
under the name of THE EAST INDIA COMPANY took with them missionarys and bibles and swords and
cannons and war-ships and went into India and they destroyed the aqueducts whereby famines came upon the
Indians, so that in course of time millions perished of starvation. It was Chistians who went into China and
enforce the opium trade, and did also make many of them drunken and worthless people. And after they were
thus drunk the idolators of Christ said Behold the drunken heathen! The indulgers in opium! But the Confucians
and Taoist of China were a mighty power and kicked the Christians out. And it was Chritians who had wars with
the Moslems over possesion of the "holy Land" and Killed each other in the name of God and Christ. And
where are the original manuscripts of the New Testament Bible? According to the Guinnes Book Of World
Records the oldest known bible is the Codex Vaticanus written in Greek (not Hebrew or Aramaic) ante 350 AD.
This is after the Council of Nicea in 325 Ad which was presided over by the Emperor Constantine which
Oahspe says was under the inspiration of the false Christ (angel-spirit). It was decided at this time what the the
holy doctirine would be of the New Testament Bible. I would say Christians and Chistianity are a bigger threat
to mankind on this Planet than Aliens.
Of course it's possible!! All through the bible there are refereces to 'flaming chariots' and objects flying in
formation, and didn't Jesus ascend to his father 'on a cloud'? Religion is the triumph of faith over logic and
anything that doesn't fit in with current belief is consigned to blasphemy or heresey. O.K., if you want to believe
in the virgin birth and you think that everything in the Bible is true, then that means we are all descended from
the same two people, (Adam Eve), and, as no girls were mentioned as children, and Cain killed his brother, then
we are all descended from a murderer who made his own mother pregnant!!!
I have read through all the previous mail and have come across a few choice quotes;
one person advocated burning books to see if the flames turned green (Didn't someone called Adolph Hitler

have the same idea?) Another went on about millions of humans disappearing and a big lie being told to cover it
up (That man Adolph Hitler again) Yet another said that Noah was only saved because of his pure blood line
(Blimey! these Nazis get everywhere ) Whichever way you cut it, if someone believes, then no ammount of
logic or argument will change their mind. But I don't mind them having their belief, so why do they resort to
threats and name calling ,when my belief is is very strong in the things that I know.

Part 2

WHO IS THE CHRIST?

When speaking of the Christ we are referring to His official name as Head of the Hierarchy. The Christ works
for all men and does not belong to any one religion. He belongs to all religions as much as He does to
Christianity. To be affiliated to the Christ does not require any person to join the Christian church. The Christ is
the Director of the Kingdom of God on Earth, the World Teacher. He is known in the Orient as the Bodhisattva
and as the Lord Maitreya, and is looked for by the devout Mohammedan under the name of the Imam Maddhi.
He is known as the great Lord of Love and Compassion, the Master of the Masters, and the Instructor of the
Angels. Today He is to be found in a physical body...daily He pours out His blessing on the world.
As the World Teacher He presides over the destiny of the great religions through the medium of a group of
Masters and Initiates who direct the activities of these different schools of thought. An example of His activities
is His overshadowing of His great Brother, the Master Jesus, who is the inspirer or director of the Christian
church.
To Christ is committed the guidance of the spiritual destinies of men and the development of the realisation
within man that he is a child of God and a son of the Most High.
The human side or nature of the Christ is perfected and sensitive to the appeal of men, while His divine side is
responsive to the impact of energies from high Spiritual sources. He will come as the God-Man, the Leader of
His people, and *"the Eldest in a great family of brothers".
It is of importance that you realize that today something new is happening. There is the emergence of a new
kingdom in nature, the fifth kingdom; this is the Kingdom of God on earth, or the kingdom, of souls. It is
precipitating on earth and will be composed of those who are becoming group-conscious, and who can work in
group formation. This will be possible, because people will have achieved a self-initiated perfection (even if
relative
in nature) and will be identified with certain group expansions in
consciousness. It will also be because they have arrived at love of their fellow men, just as they have loved
themselves in the past. Think on this with clarity, my brothers, and grasp if you can, the full significance of this
last sentence.
Their work will largely be to summarize and make effective the work of those two great Sons of God, the
Buddha and the Christ. As you know, One of them brought
illumination to the world and embodied the principle of Wisdom--- the Other brought love to the world and

embodied in himself the principle of Love. How can the effectiveness of Their work be brought about?
The process will follow three lines:
1. Individual effort, made by the individual disciple, using the technique of detachment, of dispassion, and
discrimination, which the Buddha taught.
2. Group initiation, made possible by the self-initiated effort of individual disciples, following out the
injunctions of the Christ and leading to a complete subordination of the personality and of the unit to the group
interest and group good.
3. Group endeavor, carried forward as a group, to love all beings and to apprehend and understand the true
significance of the Aquarian technique of group love and work. (1-3/4)
4. Christ taught that the Kingdom of God was on Earth and told us to seek that Kingdom first and let all other
things be of secondary importance for its sake. That Kingdom has ever been with us, composed of all those who
down the ages, have sought spiritual goals, liberated themselves from the limitations of the physical body,
emotional controls and the obstructive mind. Its citizens are
those who today (unknown to the majority) live in physical bodies, work for the welfare of humanity, use love
instead of emotion as their general technique, and compose that great body of "illumined Minds" which guides
the destiny of the world.
The Kingdom of God is not something which will descend on Earth when man is good enough! It is something
which is functioning efficiently today and demanding recognition. It is an organized body which is already
evoking recognition from those who do seek first the Kingdom of God, and discover thereby that the Kingdom
they seek is already here. Christ and His disciples are known to be physically present on Earth, and the
Kingdom which they rule, with its laws and modes of activity, is familiar to many and has been throughout the
centuries.
Christ is the world Healer and Savior. He works because He is the embodied soul of all Reality. He works today,
as He worked in Palestine two thousand years ago, through groups. There He worked through the three beloved
disciples, through the twelve apostles, through the chosen seventy and the interested five
hundred.
Now He works through His Masters and Their groups, and thereby greatly intensifies His efforts. He can and
will work through all groups just insofar as they fit themselves for planned service, for the distribution of love,
and come into conscious alignment with the great potency of the inner groups.
Those groups who have always proclaimed the physical Presence of the Christ, have so distorted the teaching
by dogmatic assertions on unimportant details and by ridiculous claims that they have evoked little recognition
of the underlying truth, nor have they portrayed a kingdom which is attractive. That Kingdom
exists, but it is not a place of disciplines or golden harps, peopled by unintelligent fanatics, but a field of service
and a place where every man has full scope for the exercise of his divinity in human service.
Revealing ones nature as Christ, and assuming it whatsoever the
consequences may be, such is the step that any man seeking Truth will have to take one day.

Crossing the border of mind, to reach the higher stage of consciousness, is the ultimate step to take to free
oneself from this worlds fantasies. The time has come for many men and women to reveal Christ within
themselves, and to express Him every day more.

Here are other chapters to the true story of Jesus

The True Story Of Jesus Part 2
The True Story Of Jesus Part 3
The True Story Of Jesus Part 4

You may email me here

The Hermetic Arcanum

This was a key work of 17th century alchemy. It was written in Latin by Jean d'Espagnet as 'Enchiridion
physicae restitutae...' and the first edition was issued at Paris in 1623. A number of editions were issued over the
next decades and it was included in a number of alchemical compendia. An English translation, translated by
Elias Ashmole, was printed in 1650, in Arthur Dee's 'Fasciculus chemicus: or chymical collections'.
Back to various texts .

The secret work of the hermetic philosophy

Wherein the secrets of nature and art concerning the matter of the philosophers' stone and
the manner of working are explained in an authentic and orderly manner.
The work of an anonymous author, penes nos unda tagi.
1. The beginning of this Divine Science is the fear of the Lord and its end is charity and love toward our
Neighbour; the all-satisfying Golden Crop is properly devoted to the rearing and endowing of temples and
hospices; for whatsoever the Almighty freely bestoweth on us, we should properly offer again to him. So also
Countries grievously oppressed may be set free; prisoners unduly held captive may be released, and souls
almost starved may be relieved.
2. The light of this knowledge is the gift of God, which by His will He bestoweth upon whom He pleaseth. Let
none therefore set himself to the study hereof, until having cleared and purified his heart, he devote himself
wholly unto God, and be emptied of all affection and desire unto the impure things of this world.
3. The Science of producing Nature's grand Secret, is a perfect knowledge of universal Nature and of Art
concerning the Realm of Metals; the Practice thereof is conversant with finding the principles of Metals by

Analysis, and after they have been made much more perfect to conjoin them otherwise than they have been
before, that from thence may result a catholic Medicine, most powerful to perfect imperfect Metals, and for
restoring sick and decayed bodies, of any sort soever.
4. Those that hold public Honours and Offices or be always busied with private and necessary occupations, let
them not strive to attain unto the acme of this Philosophy; for it requireth the whole mans, and being found, it
possesseth him, and he being possessed, it debarreth him from all other long and serious employments, for he
will esteem other things as strange, and of no value unto him.
5. Let him that is desirous of this Knowledge, clear his mind from all evil passions, especially pride, which is an
abomination to Heaven, and is as the gate of Hell; let him be frequent in prayer and charitable; have little to do
with the world: abstain from company keeping; enjoy constant tranquillity; that the Mind may be able to reason
more freely in private and be highly lifted up; for unless it be kindled with a beam of Divine Light, it will not be
able to penetrate these hidden mysteries of Truth.
6. The Alchymists who have given their minds to their well-nigh innumerable Sublimations, Distillations,
Solutions, Congelations, to manifold Extraction of Spirits and Tinctures, and other Operations more subtle than
profitable, and so have distracted themselves by a variety of errors, as so many tormentors, will never be
inclined again by their own Genius to the plain way of Nature and light of Truth; from whence their industrious
subtilty hath twined them, and by twinings and turnings, as by the Lybian Quicksands, hath drowned their
entangled Wits: the only hope of safety for them remaineth in finding out a faithful Guide and Master, who may
make the Sun clear and conspicuous unto them and free themselves from darkness.
7. A studious Tyro of a quick wit, constant mind, inflamed with the study of Philosophy, very skilful in natural
Philosophy, of a pure heart, complete in manners, mightily devoted to God, though ignorant of practical
Chymistry, may with confidence enter into the highway of Nature and peruse the Books of the best
Philosophers; let him seek out an ingenious and sedulous Companion for himself, and not despair of obtaining
his desire.
8. Let a Student of these secrets carefully beware of reading or keeping company with false Philosophers; for
nothing is more dangerous to a learner of any Science, than the company of an unskilled or deceitful man by
whom erroneous principles are stamped as true, whereby a simple and credulous mind is seasoned with false
Doctrine.
9. Let a Lover of truth make use of few authors, but of the best note and experience truth; let him suspect things
that are quickly understood, especially in Mystical Names and Secret Operations; for truth lies hid in obscurity;
for Philosophers never write more deceitfully - than when plainly, nor ever more truly - than when obscurely.
10. As for the Authors of chiefest note, who have discoursed both acutely and truly of the secrets of Nature and
hidden Philosophy, Hermes and Morienus Romanus amongst the Ancients are in my judgment of the highest
esteem; amongst the Moderns, Count Trevisan, and Raimundus Lullius are in greatest reverence with me; for
what that most acute Doctor hath omitted, none almost hath spoken; let a student therefore peruse his works,
yea let him often read over his Former Testament, and Codicil, and accept them as a Legacy of very great worth.
To these two volumes let him add both his volumes of Practice, out of which works all things desirable may be
collected, especially the truth of the First Matter, of the degrees of Fire, and the Regimen of the Whole, wherein
the final Work is finished, and those things which our Ancestors so carefully laboured to keep secret. The occult
causes of things, and the secret motions of nature are demonstrated nowhere more clearly and faithfully.
Concerning the first and mystical Water of the Philosophers he hath set down few things, yet very pithily.
11. As for that Clear Water sought for by many, found by so few, yet obvious and profitable unto all, which is
the Basis of the Philosophers' Work, a noble Pole, not more famous for his learning than subtilty of wit, who
wrote anonymously, but whose name notwithstanding a double Anagram hath betrayed, hath in his Novum

Lumen Chymicum, Parabola and Aenigma, as also in his Tract on Sulphur, spoken largely and freely enough;
yea he hath expressed all things concerning it so plainly, that nothing can be more satisfactory to him that
desireth knowledge.
12. Philosophers do usually express themselves more pithily in types and enigmatical figures (as by a mute kind
of speech) than by words; see for example, Senior's Table, the Allegorical Pictures of Rosarius, the Pictures of
Abraham Judaeus in Flamel, and the drawings of Flamel himself; of the later sort, the rare Emblems of the most
learned Michael Maierus wherein the mysteries of the Ancients are so fully opened, and as new Perspectives
they present antiquated truth, and though designed remote from our age yet are near unto our eyes, and are
perfectly to be perceived by us.
13. Whosoever affirmeth that the Philosophers' grand Secret is beyond the powers of Nature and Art, he is blind
because he ignores the forces of Sol and Luna.
14. As for the matter of their hidden Stone, Philosophers have written diversely; so that very many disagreeing
in Words, do nevertheless very well agree in the Thing; nor doth their different speech argue the science
ambiguous or false, since the same thing may be expressed with many tongues, by divers expressions, and by a
different character, and also one and many things may be spoken of after diverse manners.
15. Let the studious Reader have a care of the manifold significations of words, for by deceitful windings, and
doubtful, yea contrary speeches (as it should seem), Philosophers wrote their mysteries, with a desire of veiling
and hiding, yet not of sophisticating or destroying the truth; and though their writings abound with ambiguous
and equivocal words; yet about none do they more contend than in hiding their Golden Branch.
Which all the groves with shadows overcast,
And gloomy valleys hide.
Nor yieldeth it to any Force, but readily and willingly will follow him, who
Knows Dame Venus Birds
And him to whom of Doves a lucky pair
Sent from above shall hover 'bout his Ear.
16. Whosoever seeketh the Art of perfecting and multiplying imperfect Metals, beyond the nature of Metals,
goes in error, for from Metals the Metals are to be derived; even as from Man, Mankind; and from an Ox only,
is that species to be obtained.
17. Metals, we must confess, cannot be multiplied by the instinct and labour of Nature only; yet we may affirm
that the multiplying virtue is hid in their depths, and manifested itself by the help of Art: In this Work, Nature
standeth in need of the aid of Art; and both do make a perfect whole.
18. Perfect Bodies as Sol and Luna are endued with a perfect seed; and therefore under the hard crust of the
perfect Metals the Perfect Seed lies hid; and he that knows how to take it out by the Philosophers' Solution, hath
entered upon the royal highway; forIn Gold the seeds of Gold do lie,
Though buried in Obscurity.
19. Most Philosophers have affirmed that their Kingly Work is wholly composed of Sol and Luna; others have
thought good to add Mercury to Sol; some have chosen Sulphur and Mercury; others have attributed no small
part in so great a Work to Salt mingled with the other two. The very same men have professed that this Clear

Stone is made of one thing only, sometimes of two, or of three, at other times of four, and of five; and yet
though writing so variously upon the same subject, they do nevertheless agree in sense and meaning.
20. Now that (abandoning all blinds) we may write candidly and truly, we hold that this entire Work is perfected
by two Bodies only; to wit, by Sol and Luna rightly prepared, for this is the mere generation which is by nature,
with the help of Art, wherein the union of male and female doth take place, and from thence an offspring far
more noble than the parents is brought forth.
21. Now those Bodies must be taken, which are of an unspotted and incorrupt virginity; such as have life and
spirit in them; not extinct as those that are handled by the vulgar; for who can expect life from dead things; and
those are called impure which have suffered combination; those dead and extinct which (by the enforcement of
the chief Tyrant of the world) have poured out their soul with their blood by Martyrdom; flee then a fratricide
from which the most imminent danger in the whole Work is threatened.
22. Now Sol is Masculine forasmuch as he sendeth forth active and energizing seed, Luna is Feminine or
Negative and she is called the Matrix of Nature, because she receiveth the sperm, and fostereth it by monthly
provision, yet doth Luna not altogether want in positive or active virtue.
23. By the name of Luna Philosophers understand not the vulgar Moon, which also may be positive in its
operation, and in combining acts a positive part. Let none therefore presume to try the unnatural combination of
two positives, neither let him conceive any hope of issue from such association; but he shall join Gabritius to
Beia, and offer sister to brother in firm union, that from thence he may receive Sol's noble Son.
24. They that hold Sulphur and Mercury to be the First Matter of the Stone, by the name of Sulphur they
understand Sol; by Mercury the Philosophic Luna; so (without dissimulation) good Lullius adviseth his friend,
that he attempt not to work without Mercury and Luna for Silver; nor without Mercury and Sol for Gold.
25. Let none therefore be deceived by adding a third to two: for Love admitteth not a third; and wedlock is
terminated in the number of two; love further extended is not matrimony.
26. Nevertheless Spiritual love polluteth not any virgin; Beia might therefore without fault (before her betrothal
to Gabritius) have felt spiritual love, to the end that she might thereby be made more cheerful, more pure and
fitter for union.
27. Procreation is the end of lawful Wedlock. Now that the progeny may be born more vigorous and active, let
both the combatants be cleansed from every ill and spot, before they are united in marriage. Let nothing
superfluous cleave unto them, because from pure seed comes a purified generation, and so the chaste wedlock
of Sol and Luna shall be finished when they shall enter into combination, and be conjoined, and Luna shall
receive a soul from her husband by this union; from this conjunction a most potent King shall arise, whose
rather will be Sol and his mother Luna.
28. He that seeks for a physical tincture without Sol and Luna, loseth both his cost and pains: for Sol afforded a
most plentiful tincture of redness, and Luna of whiteness, for these two only are called perfect; because they are
filled with the substance of purest Sulphur, perfectly clarified by the skill of nature. Let thy Mercury therefore
receive a tincture from one or other of these luminaries; for anything must of necessity possess a tincture before
it can tinge other bodies.
29. Perfect metals contain in themselves two things which they are able to communicate to the imperfect metals.
Tincture and Power of fixation; for pure metals, because they are dyed and fixed with pure Sulphur to wit both
white and red, do therefore perfectly tincture and fix, if they be fitly prepared with their proper Sulphur and
Arsenic: otherwise they have not strength for multiplying their tincture.

30. Mercury is alone among the imperfect metals, fit to receive the tincture of Sol and Luna in the work of the
Philosophers' Stone, and being itself full of tincture can tinge other metals in abundance; yet ought it (before
that) to be full of invisible Sulphur, that it may be the more coloured with the visible tincture of perfect bodies,
and so repay with sufficient Usury.
31. Now the whole tribe of Philosophers do much assert and work mightily to extract Tincture out of gold: for
they believe that Tincture can be separated from Sol, and being separated increases in virtue but:Vain hope, at last the hungry Plough-man cheats
With empty husks, instead of lusty meats.
For it is impossible that Sol's Tincture can at all be severed from his natural body, since there can be no
elementary body made up by nature more perfect than gold, the perfection whereof proceedeth from the strong
and inseparable union of pure colouring Sulphur with Mercury; both of them being admirably pre-disposed
thereunto by Nature; whose true separation nature denieth unto Art. But if any liquor remaining be extracted (by
the violence of fire or waters) from the Sun, it is to be reputed a part of the body made liquid or dissolved by
force. For the tincture followeth its body, and is never separated from it. That is a delusion of this Art, which is
unknown to many Artificers themselves.
32. Nevertheless it may be granted, that Tincture may be separable from its body, yet (we must confess) it
cannot be separated without the corruption of the tincture: as when Artists offer violence to the gold destroying
by fire, or use Aqua fortis, thus rather corroding than dissolving. The body therefore if despoiled of its Tincture
and Golden Fleece, must needs grow base and as an unprofitable heap turn to the damage of its Artificer, and
the Tincture thus corrupted can only have a weaker operation.
33. Let Alchymists in the next place cast their Tincture into Mercury, or into any other imperfect body, and as
strongly conjoin both of them as their Art will permit; yet shall they fail of their hopes in two ways. First,
because the Tincture will neither penetrate nor colour beyond Nature's weight and strength; and therefore no
gain will accrue from thence to recompense the expense and countervail the loss of the body spoiled, and thus
of no value; so:Want is poor mortal's wages, when his toil Produces only loss of pain and oil.
Lastly, that debased Tincture applied to another body will not give that perfect fixation and permanency
required to endure a strong trial, and resist searching Saturn.
34. Let them therefore that are desirous of Alchemy, and have hitherto followed impostors and mountebanks,
found a retreat, spare no time nor cost, and give their minds to a work truly Philosophical, lest the Phrygians be
wise too late, and at length be compelled to cry out with the prophet, "Strangers have devoured his strength."
35. In the Philosophers' work more time and toil than cost is expended: for he that hath convenient matter need
be at little expense; besides, those that hunt after great store of money, and place their chief end in wealth, they
trust more to their riches than their own art. Let, therefore, the too credulous tyro beware of pilfering
pickpockets, for while they promise golden mountains, they lay in wait for gold, they demand bright gold (viz.,
money beforehand), because they walk in evil and darkness.
36. As those that sail between Scylla and Charybdis are in danger from both sides: unto no less hazard art they
subject who pursuing the prize of the Golden fleece are carried between the uncertain Rocks of the Sulphur and
Mercury of the Philosophers. The more acute students by their constant reading of grave and credible Authors,
and by the radiant sunlight, have attained unto the knowledge of Sulphur but are at a stand at the entrance of
their search for the Philosophers' Mercury; for Writers have twisted it with so many windings and meanderings,

involved it with so many equivocal names, that it may be sooner met with by the force of the Seeker's intuition,
than be found by reason or toil.
37. That Philosophers might the deeper hide their Mercury in darkness, they have made it manifold, and placed
their Mercury (yet diversely) in every part and in the forefront of their work, nor will he attain unto a perfect
knowledge thereof, who shall be ignorant of any Part of the Work.
38. Philosophers have acknowledged their Mercury to be threefold; to wit, after the absolute preparation of the
First degree, the Philosophical sublimation, for then they call it "Their Mercury," and "Mercury Sublimated."
39. Again, in the Second preparation, that which by Authors is styled the First (because they omit the First) Sol
being now made crude again, and resolved into his first matter, is called the Mercury of such like bodies, or the
Philosophers' Mercury; then the matter is called Rebis, Chaos, or the Whole World, wherein are all things
necessary to the Work, because that only is sufficient to perfect the Stone.
40. Thirdly, the Philosophers do sometimes call Perfect Elixir and Colouring Medicine - Their Mercury, though
improperly; for the name of Mercury doth only properly agree with that which is volatile; besides that which is
sublimated in every region of the work, they call Mercury: but Elixir - that which is most fixed cannot have the
simple name of Mercury ; and therefore they have styled it "Their Mercury" to differentiate it from that which is
volatile. A straight may is only laid down for some to find out and discern so many Mercuries of the
Philosophers, for those only:- Whom just and mighty Jove
Advanceth by the strength of love;
Or such who brave heroic fire,
Makes from dull Earth to Heaven aspire.
41. The Elixir is called the Philosophers' Mercury for the likeness and great conformity it hath with heavenly
Mercury; for to this, being devoid of elementary qualities, heaven is believed to be most propitious; and that
changeable Proteus puts on and increaseth the genius and nature of other Planets, by reason of opposition,
conjunction, and aspect. In like manner this uncertain Elixir worketh, for being restricted to no proper quality, it
embraceth the quality and disposition of the thing wherewith it is mixed, and wonderfully multiplieth the virtues
and qualities thereof.
42. In the Philosophical sublimation or first preparation of Mercury, Herculean labour must be undergone by the
workman; for Jason had in vain attempted his expedition to Colchos without Alcides.
One from on high a Golden Fleece displays
Which shews the Entrance, another says
How hard a task you'll find.
For the entrance is warded by horned beasts which drive away those that approach rashly thereunto, to their
great hurt; only the ensigns of Diana and the Doves of Venus are able to assuage their fierceness, if the fates
favour the attempt.
43. The Natural quality of Philosophical Earth and the tillage thereof, seems to be touched upon by the poet in
this verse:Let sturdy oxen when the year begins
Plough up the fertile soil,
For Zephyrus then destroys the sodden clods.

44. He that calleth the Philosophers' Luna or their Mercury, the common Mercury, doth wittingly deceive, or is
deceived himself; so the writings of Geber teach us, that the Philosophers' Mercury is Argent vive, yet not of the
common sort, but extracted out of it by the Philosophers' skill.
45. The Philosophers' Mercury is not Argent vive in its proper nature, nor in its whole substance, but is only the
middle and pure substance thereof, which thence hath taken its origin and has been made by it. This opinion of
the grand Philosophers is founded on experience.
46. The Philosophers' Mercury hath divers names, sometimes it is called Earth; sometimes Water, when viewed
from a diverse aspect; because it naturally ariseth from them both. The earth is subtle, white and sulphurous, in
which the elements are fixed and the philosophical gold is sown; the water is the water of life, burning,
permanent, most clear, called the water of gold and silver; but this Mercury, because it hath in it Sulphur of its
own, which is multiplied by art, deserves to be called the Sulphur of Argent vive. Last of all, the most precious
substance is Venus, the ancient Hermaphrodite, glorious in its double sex.
47. This Argent vive is partly natural, partly unnatural; its intrinsic and occult part hath its root in nature, and
this cannot be drawn forth unless it be by some precedent cleansing, and industrious sublimation; its extrinsic
part is preternatural and accidental. Separate, therefore, the clean from the unclean, the substance from the
accidents, and make that which is hid, manifest, by the course of nature; otherwise you make no further
progress, for this is the foundation of the whole work and of nature.
48. That dry and most precious liquor doth constitute the radical moisture of metals wherefore by some of the
ancients it is called Glass; for glass is extracted out of the radical moisture closely inherent in ashes which offer
resistance, except to the hottest flame notwithstanding our inmost or central Mercury discovers itself by the
most gentle and kindly (though a little more tedious) fire of nature.
49. Some have sought for the latent Philosophical earth by Calcination, others by Sublimation; many among
glass, and some few between vitriol and salt, even as among their natural vessels; others enjoin you to sublime
it out of lime and glass. But we have learned of the Prophet that "In the beginning God created the Heaven and
the Earth, and the Earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the Deep, and the spirit
of God moved upon the Waters, and God said, Let there be Light, and there was Light; and God saw the Light
that it was good, and he divided the light from the darkness, etc." Joseph's blessing spoken of by the same
Prophet will be sufficient to a wise man. "Blessed of the Lord be his Land, for the Apples of Heaven, for the
dew, and for the Deep that liveth Beneath: for the Apples of fruit both of sun and moon, for the top of the
ancient mountains, for the Apples of the everlasting hills, etc.," pray the Lord from the bottom of thy heart (my
son) that he would bestow upon Thee a portion of this blessed earth.
50. Argent vive is so defiled by original sin, that it floweth with a double infection; the first it hath contracted
from the polluted Earth, which hath mixed itself therewith in the generation of Argent vive, and by congelation
hath cleaved thereunto; the second borders upon the dropsy and is the corruption of intercutal Water, proceeding
from thick and impure water; mixed with the clear, which nature was not able to squeeze out and separate by
constriction; but because it is extrinsic; it flies off with a gentle heat. The Mercury's leprosy infesting the body,
is not of its root and substance, but accidental, and therefore separable from it; the earthly part is wiped off by a
warm wet Bath and the Laver of nature; the watery part is taken away by a dry bath with that gentle fire suitable
to generation. And thus by a threefold washing and cleansing the Dragon putteth off his old scales and ugly skin
is renewed in beauty.
51. The Philosophical sublimation of Mercury is completed by two processes; namely by removing things
superfluous from it, and by introducing things which are wanting. In superfluities are the external accidents,
which in the dark sphere of Saturn do make cloudy glittering Jupiter. Separate therefore the leaden colour of
Saturn which cometh up out of the Water until Jupiter's purple Star smile upon thee. Add hereunto the Sulphur
of nature, whose grain and Ferment it hath in itself, so much as sufficeth it; but see that it be sufficient for other

things also. Multiply therefore that invisible Sulphur of the Philosophers until the Virgin's s milk come forth:
and so the First Gate is opened unto thee.
52. The entrance of the Philosophers' garden is kept by the Hesperian Dragon, which being put aside, a Fountain
of the dearest water proceeding from a sevenfold spring floweth forth on every side of the entrance of the
garden; wherein make the Dragon drink thrice the magical number of Seven, until having drunk he put off his
hideous garments; then may the divine powers of light-bringing Venus and horned Diana, be propitious unto
thee.
53. Three kinds of most beautiful flowers are to be sought, and may he found in this Garden of the wise:
Damask-coloured Violets, the milk-white Lily, and the purple and immortal flower of love, the Amaranth. Not
far from that fountain at the entrance, fresh Violets do first salute thee, which being watered by streams from the
great golden river, they put on the most delicate colour of the dark Sapphire; then Sol will give thee a sign.
Thou shall not sever such precious flowers from their roots until thou make the Stone; for the fresh ones
cropped off have more juice and tincture; and then pick them carefully with a gentle and discreet hand; if the
Fates frown not, this will easily follow, and one White flower being plucked, the other Golden one will not be
wanting; let the Lily and the Amaranth succeed with still greater care and longer labour.
54. Philosophers have their sea also, wherein small fishes plump and shining with silver scales are generated;
which he that shall entangle, and take by a fine and small net shall be accounted a most expert fisherman.
55. The Philosophers' Stone is found in the oldest mountains, and flows from everlasting brooks; those
mountains are of silver, and the brooks are even of gold: from thence gold and silver and all the treasures of
Kings are produced.
56. Whosoever is minded to obtain the Philosophers' Stone, let him resolve to take a long peregrination, for it is
necessary that he go to see both the Indies, that from thence he may bring the most precious gems and the purest
gold.
57. Philosophers extract their stone out of seven stones, the two chief whereof are of a diverse nature and
efficacy; the one infuseth invisible Sulphur, the other spiritual Mercury; that one induceth heat and dryness, and
this one cold and moisture: thus by their help, the strength of the elements is multiplied in the Stone; the former
is found in the Eastern coast, the latter in the Western: both of them have the power of colouring and
multiplying, and unless the Stone shall take its first Tincture from them it will neither colour nor multiply.
58. Recipe then the Winged Virgin very well washed and cleansed, impregnated by the spiritual seed of the first
male, and fecundated in the permanent glory of her untouched virginity, she will be discovered by her cheeks
dyed with a blushing colour; join her to the second, by whose seed she shall conceive again and shall in time
bring forth a reverend off-spring of double sex, from whence an immortal Race of most potent Kings shall
gloriously arise.
59. Keep up and couple the Eagle and Lion well cleansed in their transparent cloister, the entry door being shut
and watched lest their breath go out, or the air without do privily get in. The Eagle shall snap up and devour the
Lion in this combination; afterwards being affected with a long sleep, and a dropsy occasioned by a foul
stomach, she shall be changed by a wonderful metamorphosis into a coal black Crow, which shall begin to fly
with wings stretched out, and by its flight shall bring down mater from the clouds, until being often moistened,
he put off his wings of his own accord, and falling down again he be changed into a most White Swan. Those
that are ignorant of the causes of things may wonder with astonishment when they consider that the world is
nothing but a continual Metamorphosis; they may marvel that the seeds of things perfectly digested should end
in greatest whiteness. Let the Philosopher imitate Nature in his work.

60. Nature proceedeth thus in making and perfecting her works, that from an inchoate generation it may bring a
thing by divers means, as it were by degrees, to the ultimate term of perfection: she therefore attaineth her end
by little and little, not by leaps; confining and including her work between two extremes; distinct and severed as
by spaces. The practice of Philosophy, which is the imitator of Nature, ought not to decline from the way and
example of Nature in its working and direction to find out its happy stone, for whatsoever is without the bounds
of Nature is either in error or is near one.
61. The extremes of the Stone are natural Argent vive and perfect Elixir: the middle parts which lie between, by
help whereof the work goes on, are of three sorts; for they either belong unto matter, or operations, or
demonstrative signs: the whole work is perfected by these extremes and means.
62. The material means of the Stone are of divers kinds, for some are extracted out of others successively: The
first are Mercury Philosophically sublimated, and perfect metals, which although the be extreme in the work of
nature, yet in the Philosophical work they supply the place of means: of the former the seconds are produced;
namely the four elements, which again are circulated and fixed: of the seconds, the third is produced, to wit,
Sulphur, the multiplication hereof doth terminate the first work: the fourth and last means are leaven or
ointments weighed with the mixture of the things aforesaid, successively produced in the work of the Elixir. By
the right ordering of the things aforesaid, the perfect Elixir is finished, which is the last term of the whole work,
wherein the Philosophers' Stone resteth as in its centre, the multiplication whereof is nothing else than a short
repetition of the previous operations.
63. The operative means (which are also called the Keys of the Work) are four: the first is Solution or
Liquefaction; the second is Ablution; the third Reduction; the fourth Fixation. By Liquefaction bodies return
into their first form, things concocted are made raw again and the combination between the position and
negative is effected, from whence the Crow is generated lastly the Stone is divided into four confused elements,
which happeneth by the retrogradation of the Luminaries. The Ablution teacheth how to make the Crow white,
and to create the Jupiter of Saturn, which is done by the conversion of the Body into Spirit. The Office of
Reduction is to restore the soul to the stone exanimated, and to nourish it with dew and spiritual milk, until it
shall attain unto perfect strength. In both these latter operations the Dragon rageth against himself, and by
devouring his tail, doth wholly exhaust himself, and at length is turned into the Stone. Lastly, the operation of
the Fixation fixeth both the White and the Red Sulphurs upon their fixed body, by the mediation of the spiritual
tincture; it decocteth the Leaven or Ferment by degrees ripeneth things unripe, and sweeteneth the bitter. In fine
by penetrating and tincturing the flowing Elixir it generateth, perfecteth, and lastly, raiseth it up to the height of
sublimity.
64. The Means or demonstrative signs are Colours successively and orderly affecting the matter and its
affections and demonstrative passions, whereof there are three special ones (as critical) to be noted; to these
some add a Fourth. The first is black, which is called the Crow's head, because of its extreme blackness whose
crepusculun? sheweth the beginning of the action of the fire of nature and solution, and the blackest midnight
sheweth the perfection of liquefaction, and confusion of the elements. Then the grain putrefies and is corrupted,
that it may be the more apt for generation. The white colour succeedeth the black wherein is given the
perfection of the first degree, and of the White Sulphur. This is called the blessed stone; this Earth is white and
foliated, wherein Philosophers do sow their gold. The third is Orange colour, which is produced in the passage
of the white to the red, as the middle and being mixed of both is as the dawn with his saffron hair, a forerunner
of the Sun. The fourth colour is Ruddy and Sanguine, which is extracted from the white fire only. Now because
whiteness is easily altered by another colour before day it quickly faileth of its candour. But the deep redness of
the Sun perfecteth the work of Sulphur, which is called the Sperm of the male, the fire of the Stone, the King's
Crown, and the Son of Sol, wherein the first labour of the workman resteth.
65. Besides these decretory signs which firmly inhere in the matter, and shew its essential mutations, almost
infinite colours appear, and shew themselves in vapours, as the Rainbow in the clouds, which quickly pass away
and are expelled by those that succeed, more affecting the air than the earth: the operator must have a gentle

care of them, because they are not permanent, and proceed not from the intrinsic disposition of the matter, but
from the fire painting and fashioning everything after its pleasure, or casually by heat in slight moisture.
66. Of the strange colours, some appearing out of time, give an ill omen to the work: such as the blackness
renewed; for the Crow's young ones having once left their nest are never to be suffered to return. Too hasty
Redness; for this once, and in the end only, gives a certain hope of the harvest; if therefore the matter become
red too soon it is an argument of the greatest aridity, not without great danger, which can only be averted by
Heaven alone forthwith bestowing a shower upon it.
67. The Stone is exalted by successive digestions, as by degrees, and at length attaineth to perfection. Now four
Digestions agreeable to the four abovesaid Operations or Governments do complete the whole work, the author
whereof is the fire, which makes the difference between them.
68. The first digestion operateth the solution of the Body, whereby comes the first conjunction of male and
female, the commixtion of both seeds, putrefactium, the resolution of the elements into homogeneous water, the
eclipse of the Sun and Moon in the head of the Dragon, and lastly it bringeth back the whole World into its
ancient Chaos, and dark abyss. This first digestion is as in the stomach, of a melon colour and weak, more fit for
corruption than generation.
69. In the second digestion the Spirit of the Lord walketh upon the waters; the light begins to appear, and a
separation of waters from the waters occurs; Sol and Luna are renewed; the elements are extracted out of the
chaos, that being perfectly mixed in Spirit they may constitute a new world; a new Heaven and new Earth are
made; and lastly all bodies become spiritual. The Crow's young ones changing their feathers begin to pass into
Doves; the Eagle and Lion embrace one another in an eternal League of amity. And this generation of the World
is made by the fiery Spirit descending in the form of Water, and wiping away Original sin; for the Philosophers'
Water is Fire, which is moved by the exciting heat of a Bath. But see that the separation of Waters be done in
Weight and Measure, lest those things that remain under Heaven be drowned under the Earth, or those things
that are snatched up above the Heaven, be too much destitute of aridity.
Here let slight moisture leave a barren Soil.
70. The third digestion of the newly generated Earth drinketh up the dewy Milk, and all the spiritual virtues of
the quintessence, and fasteneth the quickening Soul to the body by the Spirit's mediation. Then the Earth layeth
up a great Treasure in itself, and is made like the coruscating Moon, afterwards like to the ruddy Sun; the former
is called the Earth of the Moon, the latter the Earth of the Sun; for both of them are beget of the copulation of
them both; neither of them any longer feareth the pains of the Fire, because both want all spots; for they have
been often cleanseth from sin by fire, and have suffered great Martyrdom, until all the Elements are turned
downward.
71. The Fourth digestion consummateth all the Mysteries of the World, and the Earth being turned into most
excellent leaven, it leaveneth all imperfect bodies because it hath before passed into the heavenly nature of
quintessence. The virtue thereof flowing from the Spirit of the Universe is a present Panacea and universal
medicine for all the diseases of all creatures. The digestions of the first work being repeated will open to thee
the Philosophers secret Furnace. Be right in thy works, that thou mayest find God favourable otherwise the
ploughing of the Earth will be in vain; Nor:Will the expected Harvest e'er requite
The greedy husbandman.
72. The whole Progress of the Philosophers' work is nothing but Solution and Congelation; the Solution of the
body, and Congelation of the Spirit; nevertheless there is but one operation of both: the fixed and volatile are
perfectly mixed and united in the Spirit! which cannot be done unless the fixed body be first made soluble and

volatile. By reduction is the volatile body fixed into a permanent body, and volatile nature doth at last change
into a fixed one, as the fixed nature had before passed into volatile. Now so long as the Natures were confused
in the Spirit, that mixed spirit keeps a middle Nature between Body and Spirit, Fixed and Volatile.
73. The generation of the Stone is made after the pattern of the Creation of the World; for it is necessary, that it
have its Chaos and First matter, wherein the confused Elements do fluctuate, until they be separated by the fiery
Spirit; they being separated, the Light Elements are carried upwards, and the heavy ones downwards: the light
arising, darkness retreats: the waters are gathered into one place and the dry land appears. At length the two
great Luminaries arise, and mineral, vegetable and animal are produced in the Philosophers' Earth.
74. God created Adam out of the mud of the Earth, wherein were inherent the virtues of all the Elements, of the
Earth and Water especially, which do more constitute the sensible and corporeal heap: Into this Mass God
breathed the breath of Life, and enlivened it with the Sun of the Holy Spirit. He gave Eve for a Wife to Adam,
and blessing them he gave unto them a Precept and the Faculty of multiplication. The generation of the
Philosophers Stone, is not unlike the Creation of Adam, for the Mud was made of a terrestrial and ponderous
Body dissolved by Water, which deserved the excellent name of Terra Adamica, wherein all the virtues and
qualities of the Elements are placed. At length the heavenly Soul is infused thereinto by the medium of the
Quintessence and Solar influx, and by the Benediction and Dew of Heaven; the virtue of multiplying ad
infinitum by the intervening copulation of both sexes is given it.
75. The chief secret of this work consisteth in the manner of working, which is wholly employed about the
Elements: for the matter of the Stone passeth from one Nature into another, the Elements are successively
extracted, and by turns obtain dominion; everything is agitated by the circles of humidum and siccum, until all
things be turned downwards, and there rest.
76. In the work of the Stone the other Elements are circulated in the figure of Water, for the Earth is resolved
into Water, wherein are the rest of the Elements; the Water is Sublimated into Vapour, Vapour retreats into
Water, and so by an unwearied circle, is the Water moved, until it abide fixed downwards; now that being fixed,
all the elements are fixed. Thus into it they are resolved, by it they are extracted, with it they live and die; the
Earth is the Tomb, and last end of all.
77. The order of Nature requireth that every generation begin from humidum and in humidum. In the
Philosophers' Work, Nature is to be reduced into order, that so the matter of the Stone which is terrestrial,
compact and dry, in the first place may be dissolved and flow into the Element of Water next unto it, and then
Saturn will be generated of Sol.
78. The Air succeeds the Water, drawn about by seven circles or revolutions, which is wheeled about with so
many circles and reductions, until it be fixed downwards, and Saturn being expelled, Jupiter may receive the
Sceptre and Government of the Kingdom, by whose coming the Philosophers' Infant is formed, nourished in the
womb, and at length is born; resembling the splendour of Luna in her beautiful and Serene countenance.
79. The Fire executes the courses of the Nature of the Elements, extreme Fire assisting it; of the hidden is made
the manifest; the Saffron dyeth the Lily; Redness possesseth the cheeks of the blushing Child now made
stronger. A Crown is prepared for him against the time of his Reign. This is the consummation of the first work,
and the perfect rotation of the Elements the sign whereof is, when they are all terminated in Siccum, and the
body void of Spirit lieth down, wanting pulse, and motion; and thus all the Elements are finally resolved into
Terra.
80. Fire placed in the Stone is Nature's Prince, Sol's Son and Vicar, moving and digesting matter and perfecting
all things therein, if it shall attain its liberty, for it lieth weak under a hard bark; procure therefore its freedom
that it may succour thee freely; but beware that thou urge it not above measure, for being impatient of tyranny it

may become a fugitive, no hope of return being left unto thee; call it back therefore by courteous words, and
keep it prudently.
81. The first mover of nature is External Fire, the Moderator of Internal Fire, and of the whole Work; Let the
Philosopher therefore very well understand the government thereof, and observe its degrees and points; for from
thence the welfare or ruin of the work dependeth. Thus Art helpeth Nature, and the Philosopher is the Minister
of both.
82. By these two Instruments of Art and Nature the Stone lifteth itself up from Earth to Heaven with great
ingenuity, and slideth from Heaven to Earth, because the Earth is its Nurse, and being carried in the womb of
the wind, it receiveth the force of the Superiors and Inferiors.
83. The Circulation of the Elements is performed by a double Whorl, by the greater or extended and the less or
contracted. The Whorl extended fixeth all the Elements of the Earth, and its circle is not finished unless the
work of Sulphur be perfected. The revolution of the minor Whorl is terminated by the extraction and
preparation of every Element. Now in this Whorl there are three Circles placed, which always and variously
move the Matter, by an Erratic and Intricate Motion, and do often (seven times at least) drive about every
Element, in order succeeding one another, and so agreeable, that if one shall be wanting the labour of the rest is
made void. These Circulations are Nature's Instruments, whereby the Elements are prepared. Let the
Philosopher therefore consider the progress of Nature in the Physical Tract, more fully described for this very
end.
84. Every Circle hath its proper Motion, for all the Motions of the Circles are conversant about the subject of
Humidum and Siccum, and are so concatenated that they produce the one operation, and one only consent of
Nature: two of them are opposite, both in respect of their causes and the effects; for one moveth upwards,
drying by heat; another downwards, moistening by cold; a third carrying the form of rest and sleep by digesting,
induceth the cessation of both in greatest moderation.
85. Of the three Circles, the first is Evacuation, the labour of which is in extracting the superfluous Humidum
and also in separating the pure, clean and subtle, from the gross and terrestrial dregs. Now the greatest danger is
found in the motion of this Circle, because it hath to do with things Spiritual and makes Nature plentiful.
86. Two things are chiefly to be taken heed of in moving this Circle; first, that it be not moved too intensely; the
other, that it be not moved for too long a time. Motion accelerated raiseth confusion in the matter, so that the
gross, impure and undigested part may fly out together with the pure and subtle, and the Body undissolved be
mixed with the Spirit, together with that which is dissolved. With this precipitated motion the Heavenly and
Terrestrial Natures are confounded, and the Spirit of the Quintessence, corrupted by the admixture of Earth is
made dull and invalid. By too long a motion the Earth is too much evacuated of its Spirit, and is made so
languishing, dry and destitute of Spirit, that it cannot easily be restored and recalled to its Temperament. Either
error burneth up the Tincture, or turneth it into flight.
87. The Second Circle is Restoration; whose office is to restore strength to the gasping and debilitated body by
Potion. The former Circle was the Organ of sweat and labour, but this of restoration and consolation. The action
of this is employed in the grinding and mollifying the Earth (Potter-like), that it may be the better mixed.
88. The motion of this Circle must be lighter than that of the former, especially in the beginning of its
Revolution, lest the Crow's young ones be drowned in nest by a large flood, and the growing world be drowned
by a deluge. This is the Weigher and Assayer of Measures, for it distributeth Water by Geometrical Precepts.
There is usually no greater Secret found in the whole practice of the Work than the firm and justly weighed
Motion of this Circle; for it informeth the Philosophers' infant and inspireth Soul and Life into him.

89. The Laws of this Circle's motions are, that it run about gently: and by little and little, and sparingly let forth
itself, lest that by making haste it fail from its measure, and the Fire inherent be overwhelmed with the Waters,
the Architect of the Work grow dull, or also be extinguished: that meat and drink be administered by turns, to
the end there may be a better Digestion made, and the best temperament of Humidum, and Siccum; for the
indissoluble colligation of them both is the End and Scope of the Work. Furthermore see, that you add so much
by Watering, as shall be found wanting in assaying, that Restoration may restore so much of the lost strength by
corroborating, as Evacuation hath taken away by debilitating.
90. Digestion, the last Circle, acteth with silent and insensible Motion; and therefore it is said by Philosophers,
that it is made in a secret furnace; it decocteth the Nutriment received, and converteth it into the Homogeneous
parts of the body. Moreover, it is called Putrefaction; because as meat is corrupted in the Stomach before it
passeth into Blood and similar parts; so this operation breaketh the Aliment with a concocting and Stomach heat
and in a manner makes it to putrefy that it may be the better Fixed, and changed from a Mercurial into a
Sulphurous Nature. Again, it is called Inhumation, because by it the Spirit is inhumated, as a dead man buried in
the ground. But because it goeth most slowly, it therefore needeth a longer time. The two former Circles do
labour especially in dissolving, this in congealing although all of them work in both ways.
91. The Laws of this Circle are, that it be moved by the Feverish and most gentle heat of Dung, lest that the
things volatile fly out, and the Spirit be troubled at the time of its strictest Conjunction with the Body, for then
the business is perfected in the greatest tranquillity and ease; therefore we must especially beware lest the Earth
be moved by any Winds or Showers. Lastly, as this third Circle may always succeed the second straightways
and in due order, as the second the first: so by interrupted works and by course those three erratic Circles do
complete one entire circulation, which often reiterated doth at length turn all things into Earth, and makes
similarity between opposites.
92. Nature useth Fire, so also doth Art after its example, as an Instrument and Mallet in cutting out its works. In
both operations therefore Fire is Master and Perfector. Wherefore the knowledge of Fire is most necessary for a
Philosopher, without which as another Ixion (condemned to labour in vain) he shall turn about the Whorl of
Nature to no purpose.
93. The name Fire is Equivocal amongst Philosophers; for sometimes it is used by Metonymy for heat; and so
there be as many fires as heats. In the Generation of Metals and Vegetables Nature acknowledgeth a Three-fold
Fire; to wit, Celestial, Terrestrial and Innate. The First flows from Sol as its Fountain into the Bosom of the
Earth; it stirreth up Fumes, or Mercurial and Sulphurous vapours, of which the Metals are created, and mixeth
itself amongst them; it stirreth up that torpid fire which is placed in the seeds of Vegetables, and addeth fresh
sparks unto it, as a spur to vegetation. The Second lurketh in the bowels of the Earth, by the Impulse and action
whereof the Subterraneous vapours are driven upwards as through pores and pipes, and thrusts outwards from
the Centre towards the surface of the Earth, both for the composition of Metals, where the Earth swelleth up, as
also for the production of Vegetables, by putrefying their seeds, by softening and preparing them for generation.
The third Fire, viz., Innate is also indeed Solar; it is generated of a vapid smoke of Metals, and also being
infused with the monthly provision grows together with the humid matter, and is retained as in a Prison; or more
truly, as form is conjoined with the mixed body; it firmly inhereth in the seeds of Vegetables, until being
solicited by the point of its Father's rays it be called out, then Motion intrinsically moveth and informeth the
matter, and becomes the Moulder and Dispenser of the whole Mixture. In the generation of Animals, Celestial
Fire doth insensibly co-operate with the Animal, for it is the first Agent in Nature; for the heat of the female
answereth to Terrestrial Fire; when the Seed putrefies, this warmth prepareth it. For truly the Fire is implanted
in the Seed; then the Son of Sol disposeth of the matter, and being disposed, he informeth it.
94. Philosophers have observed a three-fold Fire in the matter of their work, Natural, Unnatural, and ContraNatural. The Natural they call the Fiery Celestial Spirit Innate, kept in the profundity of matter, and most strictly
bound unto it, which by the sluggish strength of metal grows dull, until being stirred up and freed by the
Philosophers' discretion and external heat, it shall have obtained a faculty of moving its body dissolved, and so

it may inform its humid matter, by Un-folding Penetration, Dilatation and Congelation. In every mixed body
Natural Fire is the Principle of Heat and Motion. Unnatural Fire they name that which being procured and
coming from without is introduced into the matter artificially; that it may increase and multiply the strength of
the natural heat. The Fire Contrary to Nature they call that which putrefieth the Compositum, and corrupteth the
temperament of Nature. It is imperfect, because being too weak for generation, it is not carried beyond the
bounds of corruption: such is the Fire or heat of the menstruum: yet it hath the name improperly of Fire against
Nature, because in a manner it is according to Nature, for although it destroys the specific form, and corrupteth
the matter, yet it disposeth it for reproduction.
95. It is more credible nevertheless that the corrupting Fire, called Fire against Nature, is not different from the
Innate, but the first degree of it, for the order of nature requireth, that Corruption should precede Generation: the
fire therefore that is innate, agreeable to the Law of Nature, performeth both, by exciting both successively in
the matter: the first of corruption more gentle stirred up by feeble heat to mollify and prepare the body: the other
of generation more forcible, moved by a more vehement heat, to animate and fully inform the Elementary body
disposed of by the former. A double Motion doth therefore proceed from a double degree of heat of the same
fire; neither is it to be accounted a double Fire, for far better may the name of "Fire contrary to Nature" be given
to violent and destructive fire.
96. Unnatural Fire is converted into Natural or Innate Fire by successive degrees of Digestion, and increaseth
and multiplieth it. Now the whole secret consisteth in the multiplication of Natural Fire, which of itself is not
able to Work above its proper strength, nor communicate a perfect Tincture to imperfect Bodies; for although it
be sufficient to itself, yet hath it not any further power; but being multiplied by the unnatural, which most
aboundeth with the virtue of multiplying doth act far more powerfully, and reacheth itself beyond the bounds of
Nature-colouring strange and imperfect bodies, and perfecting them, because of its plentiful Tincture, and the
abstruse Treasure of multiplied Fire.
97. Philosophers call their Water, Fire, because it is most hot, and indued with a Fiery Spirit; again Water is
called Fire by them, because it burneth the bodies of perfect Metals more than common fire doth for it perfectly
dissolveth them, whereas they resist our Fire, and will not suffer themselves to be dissolved by it; for this cause
it is also called Burning Water. Now that Fire of Tincture is hid in the belly of the Water and manifests itself by
a double effect, viz., of the body's Solution and Multiplication.
98. Nature useth a double Fire in the Work of generation, Intrinsic and Extrinsic; the former being placed in the
seeds and mixtures of things, is hid in their Centre; and as a principle of Motion and Life doth move and
quicken the body. But the latter, Extrinsic, whether it be poured down from Heaven or Earth, raiseth the former,
as drowned with sleep, and compels it to action; for the vital sparks implanted in the seeds stand in need of an
external motor, that they may be moved and act.
99. It is even so in the Philosophers' work; for the matter of the Stone possesseth his Interior Fire, which is
partly Innate, partly also is added by the Philosophers Art, for those are united and come inward together,
because they are homogeneous: the internal standeth in need of the external, which the Philosopher
administereth according to the Precepts of Art and Nature; this compelleth the former to move. These Fires are
as two Wheels, whereof the hidden one being moved by the visible one, it is moved sooner or later; and thus Art
helpeth Nature.
100. The Internal Fire is the middle agent between the Motor and the Matter; whence it is, that as it is moved by
that, it moveth this; and if so be it shall be driven intensely or remissly, it will work after the same manner in the
matter. The Information of the whole Work dependeth of the measure of External Fire.
101. He that is ignorant of the degrees and points of external Fire, let him not start upon the Philosophical
Work; for he will never obtain light out of darkness, unless the heats pass through their middle stages, like the
Elements, whose Extremes are not converted, but only their Means.

102. Because the whole work consisteth in Separation and perfect Preparation of the Four Elements, therefore
so many grades of Fire are necessary there unto; for every Element is extracted by the degree of Fire proper to
it.
103. The four grades of Heat are called the heat of the Water Bath, the heat of Ashes, of Coals, and of Flame,
which is also called "Optetic:" every grade hath its degrees, two at least, sometimes three; for heat is to be
moved slowly and by degrees, whether it be increased or decreased; so that Matter, after Nature's example, may
go on by degrees and willingly unto formation and completion; for nothing is so strange to Nature as that which
is violent. Let the Philosopher propound for his consideration the gentle access and recess of the Sun, whose
Light and Lamp bestoweth its heat to the things of the world, according to the times and Laws of the Universe,
and so bcstoweth a certain temperament upon them.
104. The first degree of the Bath of Heat is called the heat of a Fever; the second, of Dung. The first degree of
the second grade is the simple heat of Ashes, the second is the heat of Sand. Now the degrees of Fire, Coals and
Flame want a proper Name, but they are distinguished by the operation of the intellect, according to their
intensity.
105. Three Grades only of Fire are sometimes found amongst Philosophers, viz., the Water Bath, of Ashes and
of Flame: which latter comprehendeth the Fire of Coals and of Flame: the Heat of Dung is sometimes
distinguished from the Heat of the Bath in degree. Thus for the most part Authors do involve the light in
darkness, by the various expressions of the Philosophers' Fire; for the knowledge thereof is accounted amongst
their chief secrets.
106. In the White Work, because three Elements only are extracted, Three degrees of Fire do suffice; the last, to
wit the "Optetic," is reserved for the Fourth Element, which finisheth the Red Work. By the first degree the
eclipse of Sol and Luna is made; by the second the light of Luna begins to be restored; by the third Luna
attaineth unto the fulness of her splendour; and by the fourth Sol is exalted into the highest apex of his glory.
Now in every part the Fire is administered according to the rules of Geometry; so that the Agent may answer to
the disposition of the Patient, and their strength be equally poised betwixt themselves.
107. Philosophers have very much insisted upon secrecy in regard to their Fire; they scarce have been bold to
describe it but shew it rather by a description of its qualities and properties, than by its name: as that it is called
Airy Fire, Vaporous, Humid and Dry, Clear or Star-like; because it may easily by degrees be increased or
remitted as the Artificer pleaseth. He that desireth more of the knowledge of Fire may be satisfied by the Works
of Lullius, who hath opened the Secrets of Practice to worthy minds candidly.
108. Of the conflict of the Eagle and the Lion also they write diversely, because the Lion is the strongest animal,
and therefore it is necessary that more Eagles act together (three at least, or more, even to ten) to conquer him:
the fewer they are, the greater the contention, and the slower the Victory; but the more Eagles, the shorter the
Battle, and the plundering of the Lion will more readily follow. The happier number of seven Eagles may be
taken out of Lullius, or of nine out of Senior.
109. The Vessel wherein Philosophers decoct their work is twofold; the one of Nature, the other of Art; the
Vessel of Nature which is also called the Vessel of Philosophy is the Earth of the Stone, or the Female or Matrix,
whereinto the sperm of the Male is received putrefies, and is prepared for generation; the Vessel of Nature is of
three sorts, for the secret is decocted in a threefold Vessel.
110. The First Vessel is made of a transparent Stone, or of a stony Glass, the form thereof some Philosophers
have hid by a certain Enigmatic description; sometimes affirming that it is compounded of two pieces, to wit, an
Alembic and a Bolt-head; sometimes of three at other times of the two former with the addition of a Cover.

111. Many have feigned the multiply of such like Vessels to be necessary to the Philosophical Work, calling
them by divers names with a desire of hiding the secret by a diversity of operations; for they called it Dissolvent
of solutions; Putrefactory for putrefaction; Distillatory for distillation; Sublimatory for sublimation; Calcinatory
for calcination &c.
112. But all deceit being removed we may speak sincerely, one only Vessel of Art sufficeth to terminate the
Work of either Sulphur; and another for the Work of the Elixir; for the diversity of digestions requireth not the
change of Vessels; yea we must have a care lest the Vessel be changed or opened before the First work be ended.
113. You shall choose a form of glass Vessel round in the bottom (or cucurbit), or at least oval, the neck a hand's
breadth long or more, large enough with a straight mouth made like a Pitcher or Jug, continuous and unbroken
and equally thick in every part, that it may resist a long, and sometimes an acute Fire The cucurbit is called a
Blind-head because its eye is blinded with the Hermetic seal, lest anything from without should enter in, or the
Spirit steal out.
114. The second Vessel of Art may be of Wood, of the trunk of an Oak, cut into two hollow Hemispheres,
wherein the Philosophers' Egg may be cherished till it be hatched; of which see the Fountain of Trevisan.
115. The third Vessel Practitioners have called their Furnace, which keeps the other Vessels with the matter and
the whole work: this also Philosophers have endeavoured to hide amongst their secrets.
116. The Furnace which is the Keeper of Secrets, is called Athanor, from the immortal Fire, which it always
preserveth; for although it afford unto the Work continual Fire, yet sometimes unequally, which reason requireth
to be administered more or less according to the quantity of matter, and the capacity of the Furnace.
117. The matter of the Furnace is made of Brick, or of daubed Earth, or of Potter's clay well beaten and prepared
with horse dung, mixed with hair, so that it may cohere the firmer, and may not be cracked by long heating; let
the walls be three or four fingers thick, to the end that the furnace may be the better able to keep in the heat and
withstand it.
118. Let the form of the Furnace be round, the inward altitude of two feet or thereabouts, in the midst whereof
an Iron or Brazen plate must be set, of a round Figure, about the thickness of a Penknife's back, in a manner
possessing the interior latitude of the Furnace, but a little narrower than it, lest it touch the walls; it must lean
upon three or four props of Iron fixed to the walls, and let it be full of holes, that the heat may be the more
easily carried upwards by them, and between the sides of the Furnace and the Plate. Below the Plate let there be
a little door left, and another above in the walls of the Furnace, that by the Lower the Fire may be put in, and by
the higher the temperament of the heat may be sensibly perceived; at the opposite part whereof let there be a
little window of the Figure of a Rhomboid fortified with glass, that the light over against it may shew the
colours to the eye. Upon the middle of the aforesaid plate, let the Tripod of secrets be placed with a double
Vessel. Lastly, let the Furnace be very well covered with a shell or covering agreeable unto it, and take care that
the little doors be always closely shut, lest the heat escape.
119. Thus thou hast all things necessary to the First Work, the end whereof is the generation of two sorts of
Sulphur; the composition and perfection of both may be thus finished.
The Practice of the Sulphur.
Take a Red Dragon, courageous, warlike, to whom no natural strength is wanting; and afterwards seven or nine
noble Eagles (Virgins), whose eyes will not wax dull by the rays of the Sun: cast the Birds with the Beast into a
clear Prison and strongly shut them up; under this let a Bath be placed, that they may be incensed to fight by the
warmth, in a short time they will enter into a long and harsh contention, until at length about the 45th day or the
50th the Eagles begin to prey upon and tear the beast to pieces, which dying will infect the whole Prison with its
black and direful poison, whereby the Eagles being wounded, they will also be constrained to give up the ghost.

From the putrefaction of the dead Carcasses a Crow will be generated, which by little and little will put forth its
head, and the Heat being somewhat increased it will forthwith stretch forth its wings and begin to fly; but
seeking chinks from the Winds and Clouds, it will long hover about; take heed that it find not any chinks. At
length being made white by a gentle and long Rain, and with the dew of Heaven it will be changed into a White
Swan, but the new born Crow is a sign of the departed Dragon. In making the Crow White, extract the
Elements, and distil them according to the order prescribed, until they be fixed in their Earth, and end in Snowlike and most subtle dust, which being finished thou shalt enjoy thy first desire, the White Work.
120. If thou intendest to proceed further to the Red, add the Element of Fire, which is not needed for the White
Work: the Vessel therefore being fixed, and the Fire strengthened by little and little through its grades, force the
matter until the occult begin to be made manifest, the sign whereof will be the Orange colour arising: raise the
Fire to the Fourth degree by its degrees, until by the help of Vulcan, purple Roses be generated from the Lily,
and lastly the Amaranth dyed with the dark Redness of blood: but thou mayest not cease to bring out Fire by
Fire, until thou shalt behold the matter terminated in most Red ashes, imperceptible to the touch. This Red Stone
may rear up thy mind to greater things, by the blessing and assistance of the holy Trinity.
121. They that think they have brought their work to an end by perfect Sulphur, not knowing Nature or Art, and
to have fulfilled the Precepts of the secret are much deceived, and will try Projection in vain; for the Praxis of
the Stone is perfected by a double Work; the First is the creation of the Sulphur; the Second is the making of the
Elixir.
122. The aforesaid Philosophers' Sulphur is most subtle Earth, most hot and dry, in the belly whereof the Fire of
Nature abundantly multiplied is hidden. Therefore it deserveth the name of the Fire of the Stone, for it hath in
itself the virtue of opening and penetrating the bodies of Metals, and of turning them into its own temperament
and producing its like, wherefore it is called a Father and Masculine seed.
123. That we may leave nothing untouched, let the Students in Philosophy know that from that first Sulphur, a
second is generated which may be multiplied ad infinitum: let the wise man, after he hath got the everlasting
mineral of that Heavenly Fire, keep it diligently. Now of what matter Sulphur is generated, of the same it is
multiplied, a small portion of the first being added, yet as in the Balance. The rest, a tyro may see in Lullius, it
may suffice only to point to this.
124. The Elixir is compounded of a threefold matter, namely, of Metallic Water or Mercury sublimated as
before; of Leaven White or Red, according to the intention of the Operator; and of the Second Sulphur, all by
Weight.
125. There are Five proper and necessary qualities in the perfect Elixir, that it be fusible, permanent,
penetrating, tincturing, and multiplying; it borroweth its tincture and fixation from the Leaven; its penetration
from the Sulphur; its fusion from Argent vive, which is the medium of conjoining Tinctures; to wit of the
Ferment and Sulphur; and its multiplicative virtue from the Spirit infused into the Quintessence.
126. Two perfect Metals give a perfect Tincture, because they are dyed with the pure Sulphur of Nature, and
therefore no Ferment of Metals may be sought except these two bodies; therefore dye thy Elixir White and Red
with Luna and Sol; Mercury first of all receives their Tincture, and having received it, doth communicate it to
others.
127. In compounding the Elixir take heed you change not or mix any thing with the Ferments, for either Elixir
must have its proper Ferment, and desireth its proper Elements; for it is provided by Nature that the two
Luminaries have their different Sulphurs and distinct tinctures.
128. The Second work is concocted as the First, in the same or a like Vessel, the same Furnace, and by the same
degrees of fire, but is perfected in a shorter time.

129. There are three humours in the Stone, which are to be extracted successively; namely, Watery, Airy, and
Radical; and therefore all the labour and care of the Workman is employed about the humour, neither is any
other Element in the Work of the Stone circulated beside the humid one. For it is necessary, in the first place,
that the Earth be resolved and melted into humour. Now the Radical humour of all things, accounted Fire, is
most tenacious, because it is tied to the Centre of Nature, from which it is not easily separated; extract,
therefore, these three humours slowly and successively; dissolving and congealing them by their Whorls, for by
the multiplied alternative reiteration of Solution and Congelation the Whorl is extended and the whole work
finished.
130. The Elixir's perfection consisteth in the strict Union and indissoluble Matrimony of Siccum and Humidum,
so that they may not be separated, but the Siccum may flow with moderate heat into the Humidum, abiding
every pressure of Fire. The sign of perfection is that if a very little of it be cast in above the Iron or Brazen Plate
while very hot, it flow forthwith without smoke.
Let three weights of Red Earth or of Red Ferment, and a double weight of Water and Air well ground up be
mixed together. Let an Amalgama be made like Butter, or Metalline Paste, so that the Earth being mollified
maybe insensible to the touch. Add one weight and a half of Fire; let these be transferred to the Vessel and
exposed to a Fire of the first degree; most closely sealed; afterwards let the Elements be extracted out of their
degrees of Fire in their order, which being turned downwards with a gentle motion they may be fixed in their
Earth, so as nothing Volatile may be raised up from thence; the matter at length shall be terminated in a Stone,
Illuminated, Red and Diaphanous; a part whereof take at pleasure, and having cast it into a Crucible with a little
Fire by drops give it to drink its Red Oil and incerate it, until it be quite melted, and do flow without smoke.
Nor mayest thou fear its flight, for the Earth being mollified with the sweetness of the Potion will retain it,
having received it, within its bowels: then take the Elixir thus perfected into thine own power and keep it
carefully. In God rejoice, and be silent.
132. The order and method of composing and perfecting the white Elixir is the same, so that thou usest the
white Elements only in the composition thereof ; but the body of it brought to the term of decoction will end in
the plate; white, splendid, and crystal-like, which incerated with its White Oil will be fused. Cast one weight of
either Elixir, upon ten times its weight of Argent-vive well washed and thou wilt admire its effect with
astonishment.
133. Because in the Elixir the strength of Natural Fire is most abundantly multiplied by the Spirit infused into
the Quintessence, and the depraved accidents of bodies, which beset their purity and the true light of Nature
with darkness, are taken away by long and manifold sublimations and digestions; therefore Fiery Nature freed
from its Fetters and fortified with the aid of Heavenly strength, works most powerfully, being included in this
our Fifth Element: let it not therefore be a wonder, if it obtain strength not only to perfect imperfect things, but
also to multiply its force and power. Now the Fountain of Multiplication is in the Prince of the Luminaries, who
by the infinite multiplication of his beams begetteth all things in this our Orb, and multiplieth things generated
by infusing a multiplicative virtue into the seeds of things
134. The way of multiplying the Elixir is threefold: By the first: R, Mingle one weight of Red Elixir, with nine
times its weight of Red Water, and dissolve it into Water in a Vessel suitable for Solution; the matter being well
dissolved and united coagulate it by decoction with a gentle Fire, until it be made strong into a Ruby or Red
Lamel, which afterwards incerate with its Red Oil, after the manner prescribed until it melt and flow; so shalt
thou have a medicine ten times more powerful than the first. The business is easily finished in a short time.
135. By the Second manner. R, What Portion thou pleasest of thy Elixir mixed with its Water, the weights being
observed; seal it very well in the Vessel of Reduction, dissolve it in a Bath, by inhumation; being dissolved,
distil it separating the Elements by their proper degrees of fire, and fixing them downwards, as was done in the
first and second work, until it become a Stone; lastly, incerate it and Project it. This is the longer, but yet the
richer way, for the virtue of the Elixir is increased even an hundred fold; for by how much the more subtle it is

made by reiterated operations, so much more both of superior and inferior strength it retaineth, and more
powerfully operateth.
136. Lastly, take one Ounce of the said Elixir multiplied in virtue and project it upon an hundred of purified
Mercury, and in a little time the Mercury made hot amongst burning Coals will be converted into pure Elixir;
whereof if thou castest every ounce upon another hundred of the like Mercury, Sol will shine most purely to
thine eyes. The multiplication of White Elixir may be made in the same way. Study the virtues of this Medicine
to cure all kinds of diseases, and to preserve good health, as also other uses thereof, out of the Writings of
Arnold of Villa Nova, Lullius and of other Philosophers.
137. The Significator of the Philosopher will instruct him concerning the Times of the Stone, for the first Work
"ad Album" must be terminated in the House of Luna; the Second, in the second House of Mercury. The first
Work "ad Rubeum," will end in the Second House of Venus, and the last in the other Regal Throne of Jupiter,
from whence our most Potent King shall receive a Crown decked with most precious Rubies:
Thus doth the winding of the circling Year
Trace its own Foot-steps, and the same appear.
138. A Three-Headed Dragon keepeth this Golden Fleece; the first Head proceedeth from the Waters, the second
from the Earth, the third from the Air; it is necessary that these three heads do end in One most Potent, which
will devour all the other Dragons; then a way is laid open for thee to the Golden Fleece. Farewell! diligent
Reader; in Reading these things invocate the Spirit of Eternal Light ; Speak little, Meditate much, and Judge
aright.
The Times of the Stone.
The interpretation of The Philosophers' Significator. To every Planet two Houses were assigned by the Ancients,
Sol and Luna excepted; whereof the planet Saturn hath his two houses adjoining. Philosophers in handling their
Philosophical work, begin their years in Winter, to wit; the Sun being in Capricorn, which is the former House
of Saturn; and so come towards the right hand. In the Second place the other House of Saturn is found in
Aquarius, at which time Saturn, i.e., the Blackness of the work of the Magistery begins after the forty-fifth or
fiftieth day. Sol coming into Pisces the work is black, blacker than black, and the head of the Crow begins to
appear. The third month being ended, and Sol entering into Aries, the sublimation or separation of the Elements
begin. Those which follow unto Cancer make the Work White, Cancer addeth the greatest whiteness and
splendour, and doth perfectly fill up all the days of the Stone, or white Sulphur, or the Lunar work of Sulphur;
Luna sitting and reigning gloriously in her House, In Leo, the Regal Mansion of the Sun, the Solar work begins,
which in Libra is terminated into a Ruby Stone or perfect Sulphur. The two signs Scorpio and Sagittarius which
remain are required for the completing of the Elixir. And thus the Philosophers' admirable offspring taketh its
beginning in the Reign of Saturn, and its end and perfection in the Dominion of Jupiter.

The Sepher Yetzirah (Translated from the Hebrew by Wm. Wynn Westcott)
------------------------------------------------------------------------ (NOTE: The /Sepher Yetzirah/ is one of the most
famous of the ancient Qabalistic texts. It was first put into writing around 200 C.E. Westcott's Translation of
the /Sepher Yetzirah /was a primary source for the rituals and Knowledge Lectures of the Golden Dawn. This is
the Third Edition of Westcotts translation, first published in 1887. A Fourth Revised Edition of the Sepher
Yetzirah by Darcy Kntz, complete with Hebrew text, notes and bibliography, is available from Holmes
Publishing Group, P.O. 623, Edmonds, WA 98020.) -----------------------------------------------------------------------*INTRODUCTION* The "Sepher Yetzirah," or "Book of Formation," is perhaps the oldest Rabbinical treatise
of Kabalistic philosophy which is still extant. The great interest which has been evinced of late years in the
Hebrew Kabalah, and the modes of thought and doctrine allied to it, has induced me to translate this tractate
from the original Hebrew texts, and to collate with them the Latin versions of mediaeval authorities; and I have
also published An Introduction to the Kabalah which may be found useful to students. Three important books of
the "Zohar," or "Book of Splendour," which is a great storehouse of Kabalistic teaching, have been translated
into English by S. L. MacGregor Mathers, and the "Sepher Yetzirah" in an English translation is almost a
necessary companion to these abstruse disquisitions: the two books indeed mutually explain each other. The
"Sepher Yetzirah," although this name means "The Book of Formation," is not in any sense a narrative of
Creation, or a substitute Genesis, but is an ancient and instructive philosophical treatise upon one aspect of the
origin of the universe and mankind; an aspect at once archaic and essentially Hebrew. The grouping of the
processes of origin into an arrangement, at once alphabetic and numeral, is one only to be found in Semitic
authors. Attention must be called to the essential peculiarity of the Hebrew language, the inextricable and
necessary association of numbers and letters; every letter suggesting a number, and every group of letters
having a numerical signification, as vital as its literal meaning. The Kabalistic principles involved in the
reversal of Hebrew letters, and their substitution by others, on definite schemes, should also be studied and
borne in mind. It is exactly on these principles that the "ground-work idea" 'of this disquisition rests; and these
principles may be traced throughout the Kabalistic tractates which have succeeded it in point of time and
development, many of which are associated together in one volume known as the "Zohar," which is in the main
concerned with the essential dignities of the Godhead, with the Emanations which have sprung therefrom, with
the doctrine of the Sephiroth, the ideals of Macroprosopus and Microprosopus, and the doctrine of Reincarnation. The "Sepher Yetzirah," on the other hand, is mainly concerned with our universe and with the
Microcosm. The opinions of Hebrew Kabalistic Rabbis and of modern mystics may be fitly introduced here.
The following interesting quotation is from Rabbi Moses Botarel, who wrote his famous Commentary in
1409:--"It was Abraham our Father--blessed be he--who wrote this book to condemn the doctrine of the sages of
his time, who were incredulous of the supreme dogma of the Unity. At least, this was the opinion of Rabbi
Saadiah--blessed be he--as written in the first chapter of his book The Philosopher's Stone. These are his words:
The sages of Babylon attacked Abraham on account of his faith; for they were all against him although
themselves separable into three sects. The First thought that the Universe was subject to the control of two
opposing forces, the one existing but to destroy the other, this is dualism; they held that there was nothing in
common between the author of evil and the author of good. The Second sect admitted Three great Powers; two
of them as in the first case, and a third Power whose function was to decide between the two others, a supreme
arbitrator. The Third sect recognised no god beside the Sun, in which it recognised the sole principle of
existence." Rabbi Judah Ha Lvi (who flourished about 1120), in his critical description of this treatise, wrote:
"The Sepher Yetzirah teaches us the existence of a Single Divine Power by shewing us that in the bosom of

variety and multiplicity there is a Unity and Harmony, and that such universal concord could only arise from the
rule of a Supreme Unity." According to Isaac Myer, in his Quabbalah (p. 159), the "Sepher Yetzirah" was
referred to in the writings of Ibn Gebirol of Cordova, commonly called Avicebron, who died in A.D. 1070.
Eliphas Levi, the famous French Occultist, thus wrote of the "Sepher Yetzirah," in his Histoire de la Magie, p.
54: "The Zohar is a Genesis of illumination, the Sepher Jezirah is a ladder formed of truths. Therein are
explained the thirty-two absolute signs of sounds, numbers and letters: each letter reproduces a number, an idea
and a form; so that mathematics are capable of application to ideas and to forms not less rigorously than to
numbers, by exact proportion and perfect correspondence. By the science of the Sepher Jezirah the human spirit
is fixed to truth, and in reason, and is able to take account of the possible development of intelligence by the
evolutions of numbers. The Zohar represents absolute truth, and the Sepher Jezirah provides the means by
which we may seize, appropriate and make use of it." Upon another page Eliphas Lvi writes: "The Sepher
Jezirah and the Apocalypse are the masterpieces of Occultism; they contain more wisdom than words; their
expression is as figurative as poetry, and at the same time it is as exact as mathematics. In the volume entitled
La Kabbale by the eminent French scholar, Adolphe Franck, there is a chapter on the "Sepher Yetzirah." He
writes as follows:-- "The Book of Formation contains, I will not say system of physics, but of cosmology such
as could be conceived at an age and in a country where the habit of explaining all phenomena by the immediate
action of the First Cause, tended to check the spirit of observation, and where in consequence certain general
and superficial relations perceived in the natural world passed for the science of Nature.""Its form is simple
and grave; there is nothing like a demonstration nor an argument; but it consists rather of a series of aphorisms,
regularly grouped, and which have all the conciseness of the most ancient oracles." In his analysis of the
"Sepher Yetzirah," he adds:--"The Book of Formation, even if it be not very voluminous, and if it do not
altogether raise us to very elevated regions of thought, yet offers us at least a composition which is very
homogeneous and of a rare originality. The clouds which the imagination of commentators have gathered
around it, will be dissipated, if we look for, in it, not mysteries of ineffable wisdom, but an attempt at a
reasonable doctrine, made when reason arose, an effort to grasp the plan of the universe, and to secure the link
which binds to one common principle, all the elements which are around us." "The last word of this system is
the substitution of the absolute divine Unity for every idea of Dualism, for that pagan philosophy which saw in
matter an eternal substance whose laws were not in accord with Divine Will; and for the Biblical doctrine,
which by its idea of Creation, postulates two things, the Universe and God, as two substances absolutely distinct
one from the other. "In fact, in the 'Sepher Yetzirah,' God considered as the Infinite and consequently the
indefinable Being, extended throughout all things by his power and existence, is while above, yet not outside of
numbers, sounds and letters--the principles and general laws which we recognise." "Every element has its
source from a higher form, and all things have their common origin from the Word (Logos), the Holy Spirit.
So God is at once, in the highest sense, both the matter and the form of the universe. Yet He is not only that
form; for nothing can or does exist outside of Himself; His substance is the foundation of all, and all things bear
His imprint and are symbols of His intelligence." Hebrew tradition assigns the doctrines of the oldest portions
of the "Zohar" to a date antecedent to the building of the Second Temple, but Rabbi Simeon ben Jochai, who
lived in the reign of the Emperor Titus, A.D. 70-80, is considered to have been the first to commit these to
writing, and Rabbi Moses de Leon, of Guadalaxara, in Spain, who died in 1305, certainly reproduced and
published the "Zohar." Ginsburg, speaking of the Zoharic doctrines of the Ain Suph, says that they were
unknown until the thirteenth century, but he does not deny the great antiquity of the "Sepher Yetzirah," in which
it will be noticed the "Ain Suph Aur" and "Ain Suph" are not mentioned.I suggest, however, that this omission
is no proof that the doctrines of "Ain Suph Aur" and "Ain Suph" did not then exist, because it is a reasonable
supposition that the "Sepher Yetzirah" was the volume assigned to the Yetziratic World, the third of the four
Kabalistic Worlds of Emanation, while the "Asch Metzareph" is concerned with the Assiatic, fourth, or lowest
World of Shells, and is on the face of it an alchemical treatise; and again the "Siphra Dtzenioutha" may be
fittingly considered to be an Aziluthic work, treating of the Emanations of Deity alone; and there was doubtless
a fourth work assigned to the World of Briah--the second type, but I have not been able to identify this treatise.
Both the Babylonian and the Jerusalem Talmuds refer to the "Sepher Yetzirah." Their treatise, named
"Sanhedrin," certainly mentions the "Book of Formation," and another similar work; and Rashi in his
commentary on the treatise "Erubin," considers this a reliable historical notice.Other historical notices are those
of Saadya Gaon, who died A.D. 940, and Judah Ha Levi, A.D. 1150; both these Hebrew classics speak of it as a

very ancient work. Some modern critics have attributed the authorship to the Rabbi Akiba, who lived in the time
of the Emperor Hadrian, A.D. 120, and lost his life in supporting the claims of Barchocheba, a false messiah:
others suggest it was first written about A.D. 200. Graetz however assigns it to early Gnostic times, third or
fourth century, and Zunz speaks of it as post Talmudical, and belonging to the Geonim period 700-800 A.D.;
Rubinsohn, in the Bibliotheca Sacra, speaks of this latter idea as having no real basis. The Talmuds were first
collected into a concrete whole, and printed in Venice, 1520 A.D. The "Zohar" was first printed in Mantua in
1558; again in Cremona, 1560; and at Lublin, 1623; and a fourth edition by Knorr von Rosenroth, at Sulzbach
in 1684. Some parts are not very ancient, because the Crusades are mentioned in one chapter. Six extant Hebrew
editions of the "Sepher Yetzirah" were collected and printed at Lemberg in 1680. The oldest of these six
recensions was that of Saadjah Gaon (by some critics called spurious).There are still extant three Latin versions,
viz., that of Gulielmus Postellus; one by Johann Pistorius; and a third by Joannes Stephanus Rittangelius; this
latter gives both Hebrew and Latin versions, and also "The Thirty-Two Paths" as a supplement. There is a
German translation, by Johann Friedrich von Meyer, dated 1830; a version by Isidor Kalisch, in which he has
reproduced many of the valuable annotations of Meyer; an edition in French by Papus, 1888; an edition in
French by Mayer Lambert, 1891, with the Arabic Commentary of Saadya Gaon; and an English edition by Peter
Davidson, 1896, to which are added "The Fifty Gates of Intelligence" and "The Thirty-Two Ways of Wisdom."
The edition which I now offer is fundamentally that of the ancient Hebrew codices translated into English, and
collated with the Latin versions of Pistorius, Postellus, and Rittangelius, following the latter, rather than the
former commentators. As to the authenticity of "The Sepher Yetzirah," students may refer to the Bibliotheca
magna Rabbinica of Bartoloccio de Cellerio, Rome, 1678-1692; to Basnage, History of the Jews, 1708; and to
The Doctrine and Literature of the Kabalah, by A. B. Waite, 1902.The following copies of the "Sepher Yetzirah"
in Hebrew, I have also examined, but only in a superficial manner:-- 1. A Version by Saadiah, Ab. ben David,
and three others, Mantua, 1562, 4to. 2. A Version with the commentary of Rabbi Abraham F. Dior, Amsterdam,
1642, 4to. 3. A Version with preface by M. ben J. Chagiz, Amsterdam, 1713, 16mo.4. A Version,
Constantinople, 1719, 8vo. 5. " " Zolkiew, 1745, 4to. 6. " " by Moses ben Jacob, Zozec, 1779, 4to. 7. " "
Grodno, 1806, 4to. 8. " " Dyhernfurth, 1812, 8vo. 9. " " Salonica, 1831, 8vo. 10. A MS. copy dated 1719, in the
British Museum. I add here the full titles of the three Latin versions; they are all to be found in the British
Museum Library. "Abrahami Patriarchae Liber Jezirah sive Formationis Mundi, Patribus quidem Abrahami
tempora praecedentibus revelatus, sed ab ipso etiam Abrahamo expositus Isaaco, et per pro prophetarum manus
posteritati conservatus, ipsis autem 72 Mosis auditoribus in secundo divinae veritatis loco, hoc est in ratione,
quoe est posterior authoritate, habitus." Parisiis, 1552. Gulielmus Postellus."Id est Liber Jezirah, qui Abrahamo,
Patriarchae adscribitur, una cum Commentario Rabbi Abraham F.D. super 32 semitis Sapientiae, a quibus Liber
Jezirah incipit: Translatus et notis illustratus a Joanne Stephano Rittangelio, Ling. Orient. in Elect. Acad.
Regiomontana Prof. Extraord," Amstelodami, 1642.In Tomas Primus of "Artis Cabalisticae hoc est reconditae
theologiae et philosophiae scriptorum." Basileae 1587, is found "Liber de Creatione Cabalistinis, Hebraice
Sepher Jezira; Authore Abrahamo. Successive filiis ore traditus. Hinc jam rebus Israel inclinatis ne deficeret per
sapientes Hierusalem arcanis et profundissimis sensibus literis commendatus." Johannes Pistorius. The "Sepher
Yetzirah" consists of six chapters, having 33 paragraphs distributed among them, in this manner: the first has
12, then follow 5, 5, 4, 3, and 4. Yet in some versions the paragraphs and subject-matter are found in a different
arrangement. The oldest title has, as an addition, the words, "The Letters of our Father Abraham" or "ascribed to
the patriarch Abraham," and it is spoken of as such by many mediaeval authorities: but this origin is doubtless
fabulous, although perhaps not more improbable than the supposed authorship of the "Book of Enoch,"
mentioned by St. Jude, of which two MSS. copies in the Ethiopic language were rescued from the wilds of
Abyssinia in 1773 by the great traveller James Bruce. In essence this work was, doubtless, the crystallisation of
centuries of tradition, by one writer, and it has been added to from time to time, by later authors, who have also
revised it. Some of the additions, which were rejected even by mediaeval students, I have not incorporated with
the text at all, and I present in this volume only the undoubted kernel of this occult nut, upon which many great
authorities, Hebrew, German, Jesuit and others, have written long Commentaries, and yet have failed to explain
satisfactorily. I find Kalisch, speaking of these Commentaries, says, "they contain nothing but a medley of
arbitrary explanations, and sophistical distortions of scriptural verses, astrological notions, Oriental
superstitions, a metaphysical jargon, a poor knowledge of physics, and not a correct elucidation of this ancient
book." Kalisch, however, was not an occultist; these commentaries are, however, so extensive as to demand

years of study, and I feel no hesitation in confessing that my researches into them have been but superficial. For
convenience of study I have placed the Notes in a separate form at the end of the work, and I have made a short
definition of the subject-matter of each chapter. The substance of this little volume was read as Lecture before
"The Hermetic Society of London," in the summer of 1886, Dr. Anna Kingsford, President, in the chair. Some
of the Notes were the explanations given verbally, and subsequently in writing, to members of the Society who
asked for information upon abstruse points in the "Sepher," and for collateral doctrines; others, of later date, are
answers which have been given to students of Theosophy and Hermetic philosophy, and to my pupils of the
Study Groups of the Rosicrucian Society of England.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ SEPHER YETZIRAH The Book of Formation
*CHAPTER I* Section 1. In thirty-two (1) mysterious Paths of Wisdom did Jah, (2) the Jehovah of hosts, (3)
the God of Israel, (4) the Living Elohim, (5) the King of ages, the merciful and gracious God, (6) the Exalted
One, the Dweller in eternity, most high and holy--engrave his name by the three Sepharim (7) --Numbers,
Letters, and Sounds.(8) 2. Ten are the ineffable Sephiroth. (9) Twenty-two are the Letters, the Foundation of all
things; there are Three Mothers, Seven Double and Twelve (10) Simple letters. 3. The ineffable Sephiroth are
Ten, as are the Numbers; and as there are in man five fingers over against five, so over them is established a
covenant of strength, by word of mouth, and by the circumcision of the flesh. (11) 4. Ten is the number of the
ineffable Sephiroth, ten and not nine, ten and not eleven. Understand this wisdom, and be wise by the
perception. Search out concerning it, restore the Word to its creator, and replace Him who formed it upon his
throne. (12) 5. The Ten ineffable Sephiroth have ten vast regions bound unto them; boundless in origin and
having no ending; an abyss (13) of good and of ill; measureless height and depth; boundless to the East and the
West; boundless to the North and South; (14) and the Lord the only God, (15) the Faithful King rules all these
from his holy seat, (16) for ever and ever. 6. The Ten ineffable Sephiroth have the appearance of the Lightning
flash, (17) their origin is unseen and no end is perceived. The Word is in them as they rush forth and as they
return, they speak as from the whirl-wind, and returning fall prostrate in adoration before the Throne. 7. The Ten
ineffable Sephiroth, whose ending is even as their origin, are like as a flame arising from a burning coal. For
God (18) is superlative in his Unity, there is none equal unto Him: what number canst thou place before One. 8.
Ten are the ineffable Sephiroth; seal up thy lips lest thou speak of them, and guard thy heart as thou considerest
them; and if thy mind escape from thee bring it back to thy control; even as it was said, "running and returning"
(the living creatures ran and returned) (19) and hence was the Covenant made. 9. The ineffable Sephiroth give
forth the Ten numbers. First; the Spirit of the God of the living; (20) Blessed and more than blessed be the
Living God (21) of ages. The Voice, the Spirit, and the Word, (22) these are the Holy Spirit. 10. Second; from
the Spirit He produced Air, and formed in it twenty-two sounds--the letters; three are mothers, seven are double,
and twelve are simple; but the Spirit is first and above these. Third; from the Air He formed the Waters, and
from the formless and void (23) made mire and clay, and designed surfaces upon them, and hewed recesses in
them, and formed the strong material foundation. Fourth; from the Water He formed Fire (24) and made for
Himself a Throne of Glory with Auphanim, Seraphim and Kerubim, (25) as his ministering angels; and with
these three (26) he completed his dwelling, as it is written, "Who maketh his angels spirits and his ministers a
flaming fire." (27) 11. He selected three letters from among the simple ones and sealed them and formed them
into a Great Name, I H V, (28) and with this He sealed the universe in six directions. Fifth; He looked above,
and sealed the Height with I H V. Sixth; He looked below, and sealed the Depth with I V H. Seventh; He looked
forward, and sealed the East with H I V. Eighth; He looked backward, and sealed the West with H V I. Ninth;
He looked to the right, and sealed the South with V I H. Tenth; He looked to the left, and sealed the North with
V H I. 12. Behold! From the Ten ineffable Sephiroth do, proceed--the One Spirit of the Gods of the living, Air,
Water, Fire; and also Height, Depth, East, West, South and North. (29)
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *CHAPTER II* Section 1. The twenty-two sounds
and letters are the Foundation of all things. Three mothers, seven doubles and twelve simples. The Three
Mothers are Aleph, Mem and Shin, they are Air, Water and Fire Water is silent, Fire is sibilant, and Air derived
from the Spirit is as the tongue of a balance standing between these contraries which are in equilibrium,
reconciling and mediating between them. 2. He hath formed, weighed, and composed with these twenty-two
letters every created thing, and the form of everything which shall hereafter be. 3. These twenty-two sounds or
letters are formed by the voice, impressed on the air, and audibly modified in five places; in the throat, in the
mouth, by the tongue, through the teeth, and by the lips. (31) 4. These twenty-two letters, which are the

foundation of all things, He arranged as upon a sphere with two hundred and thirty-one gates, and the sphere
may be rotated forward or backward, whether for good or for evil; from the good comes true pleasure, from evil
nought but torment. 5. For He shewed the combination of these letters, each with the other; Aleph with all, and
all with Aleph; Beth with all, and all with Beth. Thus in combining all together in pairs are produced the two
hundred and thirty-one gates of knowledge. (32) 6. And from the non-existent (33) He made Something; and all
forms of speech and everything that has been produced; from the empty void He made the material world, and
from the inert earth He brought forth everything that hath life. He hewed, as it were, vast columns out of the
intangible air, and by the power of His Name made every creature and everything that is; and the production of
all things from the twenty-two letters is the proof that they are all but parts of one living body. (34)
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *CHAPTER III* Section 1. The Foundation of all
the other sounds and letters is provided by the Three Mothers, Aleph, Mem and Shin; they resemble a Balance,
on the one hand the guilty, on the other hand the purified, and Aleph the Air is like the Tongue of a Balance
standing between them. (35) 2. The Three Mothers, Aleph, Mem and Shin, are a great Mystery, very admirable
and most recondite, and sealed as with six rings; and from them proceed Air, Fire, and Water, which divide into
active and passive forces. The Three Mothers, Aleph, Mem and Shin, are the Foundation, from them spring
three Fathers, and from these have proceeded all things that are in the world. 3. The Three Mothers in the world
are Aleph, Mem and Shin: the heavens (36) were produced (37) from Fire; the earth from the Water; and the Air
from the Spirit is as a reconciler between the Fire and the Water. 4. The Three Mothers, Aleph, Mem and Shin,
Fire, Water and Air, are shown in the Year: from the fire came heat, from the waters came cold, and from the air
was produced the temperate state, again a mediator between them. The Three Mothers, Aleph, Mem and Shin,
Fire, Water and Air, are found in Man: from the fire was formed the head; from the water the belly; and from the
air was formed the chest, again placed as a mediator between the others. 5. These Three Mothers did He
produce and design, and combined them; and He sealed them as the three mothers in the Universe, in the Year
and in Man--both male and female. He caused the letter Aleph to reign in Air and crowned it, and combining it
with the others He sealed it, as Air in the World, as the temperate (climate) of the Year, and as the breath in the
chest (the lungs for breathing air) in Man: the male with Aleph, Mem, Shin, the female with Shin, Mem, Aleph.
He caused the letter Mem to reign in Water, crowned it, and combining it with the others formed the earth in the
world, cold in the year, and the belly in man, male and female, the former with Mem, Aleph, Shin, the latter
with Mem, Shin, Aleph. He caused Shin to reign in Fire, and crowned it, and combining it with the others sealed
with it the heavens in the universe, heat in the year and the head in man, male and female. (38)
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *CHAPTER IV* Section 1. The Seven double
letters, Beth, Gimel, Daleth, Kaph, Peh, Resh, and Tau have each two sounds associated with them. They are
referred to Life, Peace, Wisdom, Riches, Grace, Fertility and Power. The two sounds of each letter are the hard
and the soft--the aspirated and the softened. They are called Double, because each letter presents a contrast or
permutation; thus Life and Death; Peace and War; Wisdom and Folly; Riches and Poverty; Grace and
Indignation; Fertility and Solitude; Power and Servitude. 2. These Seven Double Letters point out seven
localities; Above, Below, East, West, North, South, and the Palace of Holiness in the midst of them sustaining
all things. 3. These Seven Double Letters He designed, produced, and combined, and formed with them the
Planets of this World, the Days of the Week, and the Gates of the soul (the orifices of perception) in Man. From
these Seven He bath produced the Seven Heavens, the Seven Earths, the Seven Sabbaths: for this cause He has
loved and blessed the number Seven more than all things under Heaven (His Throne). 4. Two Letters produce
two houses; three form six; four form twenty-four; five form one hundred and twenty; six form seven hundred
and twenty; (39) seven form five thousand and forty; and beyond this their numbers increase so that the mouth
can hardly utter them, nor the ear hear the number of them. So now, behold the Stars of our World, the Planets
which are Seven; the Sun, Venus, Mercury, Moon, Saturn, Jupiter and Mars. The Seven are also the Seven Days
of Creation; and the Seven Gateways of the Soul of Man--the two eyes, the two ears, the mouth and the two
nostrils. So with the Seven are formed the seven heavens, (41) the seven earths, and the seven periods of time;
and so has He preferred the number Seven above all things under His Heaven. (42)
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Supplement to Chapter IV* NOTE.--This is one
of several modern illustrations of the allotment of the Seven Letters; it is not found in the ancient copies of the
"Sepher Yetzirah." He produced Beth, and referred it to Wisdom ; He crowned it, combined and formed with it
the Moon in the Universe, the first day of the week, and the right eye of man. He produced Gimel, and referred

it to Health; He crowned it, combined and joined with it Mars in the Universe, the second day of the week, and
the right ear of man. He produced Daleth, and referred it to Fertility; He crowned it, combined and formed with
it the Sun in the Universe, the third day of the week, and the right nostril of man. He produced Kaph, and
referred it to Life; He crowned it, combined and formed with it Venus in the Universe, the fourth day of the
week, and the left eye of man. He produced Peh, and referred it to Power; He crowned it, combined and formed
with it Mercury in the Universe, the fifth day of the week, and the left ear of man. He produced Resh, and
referred it to Peace; He crowned it, combined and formed with it Saturn in the Universe, the sixth day of the
week, and the left nostril of man. He produced Tau, and referred it to Beauty; He crowned it, combined and
formed with it Jupiter in the Universe, the Seventh Day of the week, and the mouth of man. By these Seven
letters were also made seven worlds, seven heavens, seven earths, seven seas, seven rivers, seven deserts, seven
days, seven weeks from Passover to Pentecost, and every seventh year a Jubilee. Mayer Lambert gives:--Beth to
Saturn and the Hebrew Sabbath--that is Saturday; Gimel to Jupiter and Sunday; Daleth to Mars and Monday;
Kaph to the Sun and Tuesday; Peh to Venus and Wednesday; Resh to Mercury and Thursday; and Tau to the
Moon and Friday. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *CHAPTER V* 1. The Twelve
Simple Letters are Hh, Vau, Zain, Cheth, Teth, Yod, Lamed, Nun, Samech, Oin, Tzaddi and Qoph; (43) they
are the foundations of these twelve properties: Sight, Hearing, Smell, Speech, Taste, Sexual Love, Work,
Movement, Anger, Mirth, Imagination, (44) and Sleep. These Twelve are also allotted to the directions in space:
North-east, South-east, the East above, the East below, the North above, the North below, the South-west, the
Northwest, the West above, the West below, the South above, and the South below; these diverge to infinity, and
are as the arms of the Universe. 2. These Twelve Simple Letters He designed, and combined, and formed with
them the Twelve celestial constellations of the Zodiac, whose signs are Teth, Shin, Tau, Samech, Aleph, Beth,
Mem, Oin, Qoph, Gimel, Daleth, and Daleth. (45) The Twelve are also the Months of the Year: Nisan, (46) Yiar,
Sivan, Tamuz, Ab, Elul, Tishri, Hesvan, Kislev, Tebet, Sabat and Adar. The Twelve are also the Twelve organs
of living creatures: (47) the two hands, the two feet, the two kidneys, the spleen, the liver, the gall, private parts,
stomach and intestines. He made these, as it were provinces, and arranged them as in order of battle for warfare.
And also the Elohim (48) made one from the region of the other. Three Mothers and Three Fathers; and thence
issue Fire, Air and Water. Three Mothers, Seven Doubles and Twelve Simple letters and sounds. 3. Behold now
these are the Twenty and Two Letters from which Jah, Jehovah Tzabaoth, the Living Elohim, the God of Israel,
exalted and sublime, the Dweller in eternity, formed and established all things; High and Holy is His Name.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Supplement to Chapter V* NOTE.--This is a
modern illustration of the allotment of the Twelve Letters; it is not found in the ancient copies of the "Sepher
Yetzirah." 1. God produced H predominant in Speech, crowned it, combined and formed with it Aries in the
Universe, Nisan in the Year, and the right foot of Man. 2. He produced Vau, predominant in mind, crowned it,
combined and formed with it Taurus in the Universe, Aiar in the Year, and the right kidney of Man. 3. He
produced Zain, predominant in Movement crowned it, combined and formed it with Gemini in the Universe,
Sivan in the Year, and the left foot of Man. 4. He produced Cheth, predominant in Sight, crowned it, combined
and formed it with Cancer in the Universe, Tammuz in the year, and the right hand of Man. 5. He produced
Teth, predominant in Hearing, crowned it, combined and formed with it Leo in the Universe, Ab in the Year, and
the left kidney in Man. 6. He produced Yod, predominant in Work, crowned it, combined and formed with it
Virgo in the Universe, Elul in the Year, and the left hand of Man. 7. He produced Lamed, predominant in Sexual
desire, crowned it, combined and formed with it Libra in the Universe, Tishri in the Year, and the private parts
of Man. (Kalisch gives "gall.") 8. He produced Nun, predominant in Smell, crowned it, combined and formed
with it Scorpio in the Universe, Heshvan in the Year, and the intestines of Man. 9. He produced Samech,
predominant in Sleep, crowned it, combined and formed with it Sagittarius in the Universe, Kislev in the Year,
and the stomach of Man. 10. He produced Oin, predominant in Anger, crowned it, combined and formed with it
Capricornus in the Universe, Tebet in the Year, and the liver of Man. 11. He produced Tzaddi, predominant in
Taste, crowned it, combined and formed with it Aquarius in the Year, and the gullet in Man). 12. He produced
Qoph, predominant in Mirth, crowned it, combined and formed with it Pisces in the Universe, Adar in the Year,
and the spleen of Man. NOTE.--Mediaeval authorities and modern editors give very different allocations to the
twelve simple letters. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *CHAPTER VI* Section 1.
Three Fathers and their generations, Seven conquerors and their armies, and Twelve bounds of the Universe.
See now, of these words, the faithful witnesses are the Universe, the Year and Man. The dodecad, the heptad,

and the triad with their provinces; above is the Celestial Dragon, T L I, (49) and below is the World, and lastly
the heart of Man. The Three are Water, Air and Fire; Fire above, Water below, and Air conciliating between
them; and the sign of these things is that the Fire sustains (volatilises) the waters; Mem is mute, Shin is sibilant,
and Aleph is the Mediator and as it were a friend placed between them. 2. The Celestial Dragon, T L I, is placed
over the universe like a king upon the throne; the revolution of the year is as a king over his dominion; the heart
of man is as a king in warfare. Moreover, He made all things one from the other; and the Elohim set good over
against evil, and made good things from good, and evil things from evil: with the good tested He the evil, and
with the evil did He try the good. Happiness (50) is reserved for the good, and misery (51) is kept for the
wicked. 3. The Three are One, and that One stands above. The Seven are divided; three are over against three,
and one stands between the triads. The Twelve stand as in warfare; three are friends, three are enemies; three are
life givers; three are destroyers. The three friends are the heart, the ears, and the mouth; the three enemies are
the liver, the gall, and the tongue; (52) while God (53) the faithful king rules over all. One above Three, Three
above Seven, and Seven above Twelve: and all are connected the one with the other. 4. And after that our father
Abraham had perceived and understood, and had taken down and engraved all these things, the Lord most high
(55) revealed Himself, and called him His beloved, and made a Covenant with him and his seed; and Abraham
believed on Him (56) and it was imputed unto him for righteousness. And He made this Covenant as between
the ten toes of the feet--this is that of circumcision; and as between the ten fingers of the hands and this is that
of the tongue. (57) And He formed the twenty-two letters into speech (58) and shewed him all the mysteries of
them. (59) He drew them through the Waters; He burned them in the Fire; He vibrated them in the Air; Seven
planets in the heavens, and Twelve celestial constellations of the stars of the Zodiac. ----- The End of "The Book
of Formation" ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ THE FIFTY GATES OF
INTELLIGENCE Attached to some editions of the "Sepher Yetzirah" is found this scheme of Kabalistic
classification of knowledge emanating from the Second Sephira Binah, Understanding, and descending by
stages through the angels, heavens, humanity, animal and vegetable and mineral kingdoms to Hyle and the
chaos. The Kabalists said that one must enter and pass up through the Gates to attain to the Thirty-two Paths of
Wisdom; and that even Moses only passed through the forty-ninth Gate, and never entered the fiftieth. See the
Oedipus Aegyptiacus of Athanasius Kircher, vol. ii. p. 319. *_First Order: Elementary_* 1. Chaos, Hyle, The
first matter. 2. Formless, void, lifeless. 3. The Abyss. 4. Origin of the Elements. 5. Earth (no seed germs). 6.
Water. 7. Air. 8. Fire 9. Differentiation of qualities. 10. Mixture and combination. *_Second Order: Decad of
Evolution_* 11. Minerals differentiate. 12. Vegetable principles appear. 13. Seeds germinate in moisture. 14.
Herbs and Trees. 15. Fructification in vegetable life. 16. Origin of low forms of animal life. 17. Insects and
Reptiles appear. 18. Fishes, vertebrate life in the waters. 19. Birds, vertebrate life in the air. 20. Quadrupeds,
vertebrate earth animals. *_Third Order: Decad of Humanity_* 21. Appearance of Man. 22. Material human
body. 23. Human Soul conferred. 24. Mystery of Adam and Eve. 25. Complete Man as the Microcosm. 26. Gift
of five human faces acting exteriorly. 27. Gift of five powers to the soul. 28. Adam Kadmon, the Heavenly Man.
29. Angelic beings. 30. Man in the image of God. *_Fourth Order: World of Spheres_* 31. The Moon. 32.
Mercury. 33. Venus. 34. Sol. 35. Mars. 36. Jupiter. 37. Saturn. 38. The Firmament. 39. The Primum Mobile. 40.
The Empyrean Heaven. *_Fifih Order: The Angelic World_* 41. Ishim--Sons of Fire. 42. Auphanim-Cherubim. 43. Aralim--Thrones. 44. Chashmalim--Dominions. 45. Seraphim--Virtues. 46. Malakim--Powers.
47. Elohim--Principalities. 48. Beni Elohim--Angels. 49. Cherubim--Arch-angels. *_Sixth Order: The
Archetype_* 50. God. Ain Suph. He Whom no mortal eye bath seen, and Who has been known to Jesus the
Messiah alone. NOTE.--The Angels of the Fifth or Angelic World are arranged in very different order by
various Kabalistic Rabbis. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ THE THIRTY-TWO
PATHS OF WISDOM Translated from the Hebrew Text of Joannes Stephanus Rittangelius, 1642: which is also
to be found in the "Oedipus Aegyptiacus" of Athanasius Kircher, 1653. (These paragraphs are very obscure in
meaning, and the Hebrew text is probably very corrupt.) The First Path is called the Admirable or the Hidden
Intelligence (the Highest Crown): for it is the Light giving the power of comprehension of that First Principle
which has no beginning; and it is the Primal Glory, for no created being can attain to its essence. The Second
Path is that of the Illuminating Intelligence: it is the Crown of Creation, the Splendour of the Unity, equalling it,
and it is exalted above every head, and named by the Kabalists the Second Glory. The Third Path is the
Sanctifying Intelligence, and is the foundation of Primordial wisdom, which is called the Creator of Faith, and
its roots are AMN; and it is the parent of Faith, from which doth Faith emanate. The Fourth Path is named the

Cohesive or Receptacular Intelligence; and is so called because it contains all the holy powers, and from it
emanate all the spiritual virtues with the most exalted essences: they emanate one from the other by the power
of the Primordial Emanation. The Highest Crown.) (1) The Fifth Path is called the Radical Intelligence, because
it resembles the Unity, uniting itself to the Binah, (2) or Intelligence which emanates from the Primordial depths
of Wisdom or Chokmah. (3) The Sixth Path is called the Mediating Intelligence, because in it are multiplied the
influxes of the emanations, for it causes that influence to flow into all the reservoirs of the Blessings, with
which these themselves are united. The Seventh Path is the Occult Intelligence, because it is the Refulgent
Splendour of all the Intellectual virtues which are perceived by the eyes of intellect, and by the contemplation of
faith. The Eighth Path is called the Absolute or Perfect Intelligence, because it is the means of the primordial,
which has no root by which it can cleave, nor rest, except in the hidden places of Gedulah, (4) Magnificence,
from which emanates its own proper essence. The Ninth Path is the Pure Intelligence, so called because it
purifies the Numerations, it proves and corrects the designing of their representation, and disposes their unity
with which they are combined without diminution or division. The Tenth Path is the Resplendent Intelligence,
because it is exalted above every head, and sits on the throne of Binah (the Intelligence spoken of in the Third
Path). It illuminates the splendour of all the lights, and causes an influence to emanate from the Prince of
countenances. (5) The Eleventh Path is the Scintillating Intelligence, because it is the essence of that curtain
which is placed close to the order of the disposition, and this is a special dignity given to it that it may be able to
stand before the Face of the Cause of Causes. The Twelfth Path is the Intelligence of Transparency, because it is
that species of Magnificence called Chazchazit, (6) the place whence issues the vision of those seeing in
apparitions. (That is the prophecies by seers in a vision.) The Thirteenth Path is named the Uniting Intelligence,
and is so called because it is itself the Essence of Glory. It is the Consummation of the Truth of individual
spiritual things. The Fourteenth Path is the Illuminating Intelligence and is so called because it is that Chashmal
(7) which is the founder of the concealed and fundamental ideas of holiness and of their stages of preparation.
The Fifteenth Path is the Constituting Intelligence, so called because it constitutes the substance of creation in
pure darkness, and men have spoken of these contemplations; it is that darkness spoken of in Scripture, Job
xxxviii. 9, "and thick darkness a swaddling band for it." The Sixteenth Path is the Triumphal or Eternal
Intelligence, so called because it is the pleasure of the Glory, beyond which is no other Glory like to it, and it is
called also the Paradise prepared for the Righteous. The Seventeenth Path is the Disposing Intelligence, which
provides Faith to the Righteous, and they are clothed with the Holy Spirit by it, and it is called the Foundation
of Excellence in the state of higher things. The Eighteenth Path is called the Intelligence or House of Influence
(by the greatness of whose abundance the influx of good things upon created beings is increased), and from its
midst the arcana and hidden senses are drawn forth, which dwell in its shade and which cling to it, from the
Cause of all causes. The Nineteenth Path is the Intelligence of the Secret of all the activities of the spiritual
beings, and is so called because of the influence diffused by it from the most high and exalted sublime glory.
The Twentieth Path is the Intelligence of Will, and is so called because it is the means of preparation of all and
each created being, and by this intelligence the existence of the Primordial Wisdom becomes known. The
Twenty-first Path is the Intelligence of Conciliation and Reward, and is so called because it receives the divine
influence which flows into it from its benediction upon all and each existence. The Twenty-second Path is the
Faithful Intelligence, and is so called because by it spiritual virtues are increased, and all dwellers on earth are
nearly under its shadow. The Twenty-third Path is the Stable Intelligence, and it is so called because it has the
virtue of consistency among all numerations. The Twenty-fourth Path is the Imaginative Intelligence, and it is so
called because it gives a likeness to all the similitudes which are created in like manner similar to its
harmonious elegancies. The Twenty-fifth Path is the Intelligence of Probation, or Temptation, and is so called
because it is the primary temptation, by which the Creator trieth all righteous persons. The Twenty-sixth Path is
called the Renewing Intelligence, because the Holy God renews by it all the changing things which are renewed
by the creation of the world. The Twenty-seventh Path is the Active or Exciting Intelligence, and it is so called
because through it every existent being receives its spirit and motion. The Twenty-eighth Path is called the
Natural Intelligence; by it is completed and perfected the nature of all that exists beneath the Sun. (This Path is
omitted by Rittangelius: I presume by inadvertence.) The Twenty-ninth Path is the Corporeal Intelligence, so
called because it forms every body which is formed in all the worlds, and the reproduction of them. The
Thirtieth Path is the Collective Intelligence, and Astrologers deduce from it the judgment of the Stars and
celestial signs, and perfect their science, according to the rules of the motions of the stars. The Thirty-first Path

is the Perpetual Intelligence; but why is it so called? Because it regulates the motions of the Sun and Moon in
their proper order, each in an orbit convenient for it. The Thirty-second Path is the Administrative Intelligence,
and it is so called because it directs and associates the motions of the seven planets, directing all of them in their
own proper courses. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NOTES TO THE SEPHER
YETZIRAH It is of considerable importance to a clear understanding of this Occult treatise that the whole work
be read through before comment is made, so that the general idea of the several chapters may become in the
mind one concrete whole. A separate consideration of the several parts should follow this general grasp of the
subject, else much confusion may result. This hook may be considered to he an Allegorical Parallel between the
Idealism of Numbers and Letters and the various parts of the Universe, and it sheds much light on many mystic
forms and ceremonies yet extant, notably upon Freemasonry, the Tarot, and the later Kabalah, and is a great aid
to the comprehension of the Astro-Theosophic schemes of the Rosicrucians. To obtain the full value of this
Treatise, it should he studied hand in hand with Hermetic attributions, the "Isiac Tablet," and with a complete
set of the designs, symbols and allocation of the Trump cards of the Tarot pack, for which see my translation of
The Sanctum Regnum of the Tarot, by Eliphas Levi. Note that the oldest MSS. copies of the "Sepher Yetzirah"
have no vowel points: the latest editions have them. The system of points in writing Hebrew was not perfected
until the seventh century, and even then was not in constant use. Ginsburg asserts that the system of vowel
pointing was invented by a Rabbi Mocha in Palestine about A.D. 570, who designed it to assist his pupils. But
Isaac Myer states that there are undoubted traces of pointing in Hebrew MSS. of the second century. According
to A. E. Waite there is no extant Hebrew MSS. with the vowel points older than the tenth century. The words
"Sepher Yetzirah" are written in Hebrew from right to left, SPR YTzYRH, Samech Peh Resh, Yod Tzaddi Yod
Resh Heh; modes of transliteration vary with different authors. Yod is variously written in English letters as I, Y,
or J, or sometimes Ie. Tzaddi is property Tz; but some write Z only, which is misleading because the Hebrew
has also a true Z, Zain. *CHAPTER I* The twelve sections of this chapter introduce this philosophic
disquisition upon the Formation and Development of the Universe. Having specified the subdivision of the
letters into three classes, the Triad, the Heptad, and the Dodecad, these are put aside for the time; and the Decad
mainly considered as specially associated with the idea of Number, and as obviously composed of the Tetrad
and the Hexad. 1. Thirty-two. This is the number of the Paths or Ways of Wisdom, which are added as a
supplement. 32 is written in Hebrew by LB, Lamed and Beth, and these are the last and first letters of the
Pentateuch. The number 32 is obtained thus--2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2=32. Laib, LB as a Hebrew word, means the Heart
of Man. Paths.The word here is NTIBUT, netibuth; NTIB meant primarily a pathway, or foot-made track; but is
here used symbolically in the same sense as the Christian uses the word, way--the way of life: other meanings
are--stage, power, form, effect; and later, a doctrinal formula, in Kabalistic writings. 2. Jah. This divine name is
found in Psalm lxviii. 4; it is translated into Greek as kurios, and into Latin as dominus, and commonly into the
English word, Lord: it is really the first half of the word IHVH or Jehovah, or the Yahveh of modern scholars. 3.
Jehovah Tzabaoth. This divine name is printed in English Bibles as Jehovah Sabaoth, or as "Lord of hosts" as in
Psalm xxiv. 10. TzBA is an army. 4. God of Israel. Here the word God is ALHI, which in unpointed Hebrew
might be God, or Gods, or My God. 5. The Elohim of the Living. The words are ALHIM ChIIM. Alhim, often
written in English letters as Elohim, or by Godftey Higgins as Aleim, seems to be a masculine plural of the
feminine form Eloah, ALH, of the divine masculine name EL, AL; this is commonly translated God, and means
strong, mighty, supreme. Chiim is the plural of Chi--living, or life. ChIH is a living animal, and so is ChIVA.
ChII is also life. Frey in his dictionary gives ChIIM as the plural word lives, or vitae. The true adjective for
living is ChIA. Elohim Chiim, then, apart from Jewish or Christian preconception, is "the living Gods," or "the
Gods of the lives, i.e., living ones." Rittangelius gives Dii viventes, "The living Gods," both words in the plural.
Pistorius omits both words. Postellus, the orthodox, gives Deus Vivus. The Elohim are the Seven Forces,
proceeding from the One Divine, which control the "terra viventium," the manifested world of life. 6. God. In
this case we have the simple form AL, EL. 7. Sepharim. SPRIM, the plural masculine of SPR, commonly
translated book or letter: the meaning here is plainly "forms of expression." 8. Numbers, Letters and Sounds.
The three Hebrew words here given are, in unpointed Hebrew, SPR, SPR and SIPUR. Some late editors, to
cover the difficulty of this passage, have given SPR, SPUR, SIPR, pointing them to read Separ, Seepur, Saypar.
The sense of the whole volume appears to need their translation as Numbers, Letters and Sounds. Pistorius gave
"Scriptis, numeratis, pronunciatis." Postellus gave "Numerans, numerus, numeratus," thus losing the contrasted
meanings; and so did Rittangelius, who gave "Numero, numerante, numerato." 9. The Ineffable Sephiroth. The

words are SPIRUT BLIMH, Sephiruth Belimah. The simplest translation is "the voices from nothing." The Ten
Sephiruth of the Kabalah are the "Ten Primary Emanations from the Divine Source," which are the primal
forces leading to all manifestation upon every plane in succession. Buxtorf gives for Sephiruth--predicationes
logicae. The word seems to me clearly allied to the Latin spiritus--spirit, soul, wind; and is used by Quintilian as
a sound, or noise. The meaning of Belimah is more doubtful. Rittangelius always gives "praeter illud
ineffabile." Pistorius gives "praeter ineffabile." Postellus evades the difficulty and simply puts the word Belimah
into his Latin translation. In Frey's Hebrew Dictionary BLIMH is translated as nothing, without any other
suggestion; BLI is "not," MR is "anything." In Kabalistic writings the Sephiruth, the Divine Voices and Powers,
are called "ineffbilis," not to be spoken of, from their sacred nature. 10. The classification of the Hebrew letters
into a Triad, Heptad and Dodecad, runs through the whole philosophy of the Kabalah. Many ancient authors
added intentional blinds, suds as forming the Triad of A.M.T., Ameth, truth; and of AMN, Amen. 11. The Two
Covenants, by the Word or Spirit, and by the Flesh, made by Jehovah with Abraham, Genesis xvii. The
Covenant of Circumcision was to be an outward and visible sign of the Divine promise made to Ahraham and
his offspring. The Hebrew word for circumcision is Mulah, MULH: note that MLH is also synonymous with
DBR, dabar,--verbum or word. 12. Rittangelius gives "replace the formative power upon his throne." Postellus
gives restore the device to its place." 13. Abyss; the word is OUMQ for OMQ, a depth, vastness, or valley. 14.
My Hermetic rituals explained this Yetziratic attribution. 15. The Lord the only God. The words are ADUN
IChID AL, or "Adonai (as commonly written) the only El." 16. Seat. The word is MOUN, dwelling, habitation,
or throne. 17. Lightning flash. In the early edition the words "like scintillating flame" are used: the Hebrew
word is BRQ. Many Kabalists have shown how the Ten Sephiroth are symbolised by the zig-zag lightning flash.
18. God; the Divine name here is Jehovah. 19. The text gives only RTzUAV ShUB--"currendo et redeundo," but
the commentators have generally considered this to be a quotation from Ezekiel i. 14, referred to H ChIVT, the
living creatures, kerubic forms. 20. The Spirit of the Gods of the Living. RUCh ALHIM ChIIIM; or as R. gives
it, "spiritus Deorum Viventium." Orthodoxy would translate these words "The spirit of the living God." 21. AL
ChI H OULMIM; "the Living God of Ages"; here the word God really is in the singular. 22. The Voice, Spirit
and Word are QUL, RUCh, DBR. A very notable Hebrew expression of Divinatory intuition was BATh QUL,
the Daughter of the Voice. 23. Formless and Void. THU and BHU; these two words occur in Genesis i. 2, and
are translated "waste and void." 24. Note the order in which the primordial elements were produced. First, Spirit
(query Akasa, Ether); then Air, Vayu; then Water, Apas, which condenses into solid elementary Earth, Prithivi;
and lastly from the Water He formed Fire. 25. The first name is often written Ophanim, the letters are AUPNIM;
in the Vision of Ezekiel i. 16, the word occurs and is translated "Wheels." ShRPIM are the mysterious beings of
Isaiah vi. 2; the word otherwise is translated Serpent, and in Numbers xxi. 6, as "fiery serpents": also in verse 8
as "fiery serpent" when Jehovah said "Make thee a fiery serpent and set it upon a pole." Kerubim. The Hebrew
words arc ChIVTh H QDSh, holy animals: I have ventured to put Kerubim, as the title of the other Biblical
form of Holy mysterious animal, as given in 1 Kings vi. 23 and Exodus xxv. 18, and indeed Genesis iii. 24.
Bible dictionaries generally give the word as Cherubim, but in Hebrew the initial letter is always K and not Ch.
26. Three. In the first edition I overlooked this word three; and putting and for as, made four classes of serving
beings. 27. This is verse 4 of Psalm civ. 28. Here follow the permutations of the name IHV, which is the
Tetragrammaton--Jehovah, without the second or final Heh: IHV is a Tri-grammaton, and is more suitable to the
third or Yetziratic plane. HVI is the imperative form of the verb to be, meaning be thou; HIV is the infinitive;
and VIH is future. In IHV note that Yod corresponds to the Father; Heh to Binah, the Supernal Mother; and Vau
to the Microprosopus--Son. 29. Note the subdivision of the Decad into the Tetrad--four elements; and the
Hexad--six dimensions of space. *CHAPTER 2* This chapter consists of philosophic remarks on the twentytwo sounds and letters of the Hebrew alphabet, and hence connected with the air by speech, and it points out the
uses of those letters to form words--the signs of ideas, and the symbols of material substances. 30. Soul; the
word is NPSh, which is commonly translated soul, meaning the living personality of man, animal or existing
thing: it corresponds almost to the Theosophic Prana plus the stimulus of Kama. 31. This is the modern
classification of the letters into guttural, palatal, lingual, dental and labial sounds. 32. The 231 Gates. The
number 242 is obtained by adding together all the numbers from 1 to 22. The Hebrew letters can he placed in
pairs in 242 different positions: thus ab, ag, ad, up to at; then ba, bb, bg, bd, up to bt, and so on to ts, tt: this is in
direct order only, without reversal. For the reason why eleven are deducted, and the number 231 specified, see
the Table and Note 15 in the edition of Postellus. 33. Non-existent; the word is AIN, nothingness. Ain precedes

Ain Suph, boundlessness; and Ain Suph Aur, Boundless Light. 34. Body; the word is GUP, usually applied to
the animal material body, but here means "one whole." *CHAPTER 3* This chapter is especially concerned
with the essence of the Triad, as represented by the Three Mothers, Aleph, Mem, and Shin. Their development
in three directions is pointed out, namely in the Macrocosm or Universe; in the Year or in Time; and in the
Microcosm or Man. 35. The importance of equilibrium is constantly reiterated in the Kabalah. The "Siphra
Dtzeniouta," or "Book of Mystery," opens with a reference to this Equilibrium as a fundamental necessity of
stable existence. 36. Heavens. The Hebrew word Heshamaim HShMIM, has in it the element of Aesh, fire, and
Mim, water; and also Shem, name; The Name is IHVH, attributed to the elements. ShMA is in Chaldee a name
for the Trinity (Parkhurst). ShMSh is the Sun, and Light, and a type of Christ, the Sun of Righteousness.
Malachi iv. 2. 37. Were produced. The Hebrew word BRA, is the root. Three Hebrew words are used in the
Bible to represent the idea of making, producing or creating. BRIAH, Briah, giving shape, Genesis i. 1. OShIH,
Ashiah, completing, Genesis i. 31. ITzIRH, Yetzirah, forming, Genesis ii. 7. To these the Kabalists add the word
ATzLH, with the meaning of "producing something manifest from the unmanifested." *_Emanation_* *_Shin_*
*_Aleph_* *_Mem_* Macrocosm Primal Fire Spirit Primal Water Universe Heavens Atmosphere The Earth
Elements Terrestrial Fire Air Water Man Head Chest Belly Year Heat Temperate Cold *CHAPTER 4* This is
the special chapter of the Heptad, the powers and properties of the Seven. Here again we have the threefold
attribution of the numbers and letters to the Universe, to the Year, and to Man. The supplemental paragraphs
have been printed in modern form by Kalisch; they identify the several letters of the Heptad more definitely
with the planets, days of the week, human attributes and organs of the senses. 39. These numbers have been a
source of difference between the editors and copyists, hardly any two editors concurring. I have given the
numbers arising from continual multiplication of the product by each succeeding unit from one to seven. 2x1=2,
2x3=6, 6x4=24, 24x5=120, 120x6=720, 720x7=5040. 40. In associating the particular letters to each planet the
learned Jesuit Athanasius Kircher allots Beth to the Sun, Gimel to Venus, Daleth to Mercury, Kaph to Luna, Peh
to Saturn, Resh to Jupiter, and Tau to Mars. Kalisch in the supplementary paragraphs gives a different
attribution; both are wrong, according to clairvoyant investigation. Consult the Tarot symbolism given by Court
de Gebelin, Eliphas Levi, and my notes to the Isiaic Tablet of Bembo. The true attribution is probably not
anywhere printed. The planet names here given are Chaldee words. 41. The Seven Heavens and the Seven
Earths are printed with errors, and I believe intentional mistakes, in many occult ancient books. Some Hermetic
MSS. have the correct names and spelling. 42. On the further attribution of these Seven letters, note that
Postellus gives: Vita--mors, Pax--afflictio, Sapientia--stultitia, Divitiae (Opus)--paupertas, Gratia--opprobrium,
Proles--sterilitas, Imperium--servitus. Pistorius gives: Vita--mors, Pax--bellum, Scientia--ignorantia, Divitiae-paupertas, Gratia--abominatio, Semen (Proles)--sterilitas, Imperium (Dominatio)--servitus. *CHAPTER 5* This
chapter is specially concerned with the Dodecad; the number twelve is itself pointed out, and the characters of
its component units, once more in the three zones of the universe, year and man; the last paragraph gives a
recapitulation of the whole number of letters: the Supplement gives a form of allotment of the several letters.
43. It is necessary to avoid confusion between these letters; different authors translate them in different
manners. Heh or H not be confused with Cheth, or Heth, Ch. Teth, Th also must be kept distinct from the final
letter Tau, T, which is one of the double letters; the semi-English pronunciation of these two letters is much
confused, each is at times both t and th; Yod is either I, Y, or J; Samech is simple S, and must not be confused
with Shin, Sh, one of the mother letters; Oin is often written in English Hebrew grammars as Ayin, and
Sometimes as Gnain; Tzaddi must not be confused with Zain, Z; and lastly Qoph, Q, is very often replaced by
K, which is hardly defensible as there is a true K in addition. 44. Postellus gives suspicion and Pistorius, mind.
45. These letters are the initials of the 12 Zodiacal signs in Hebrew nomenclature. They are: Teth Telah Aries
Mem Maznim Libra Shin Shor Taurus Oin Oqereb Scorpio Tau Thaumim Gemini Qoph Qesheth Sagittarius
Samech Sartan Cancer Gimel Gedi Capricorn Aleph Aryeh Leo Daleth Dali Aquarius Beth Bethuleh Virgo
Daleth Dagim Pisces 46. The month Nisan begins about March 29th. Yiar is also written Iyar, and Aiar: the
Hebrew letters are AIIR. 47. The list of organs varies. All agree in two hands, two feet, two kidneys, liver, gall
and spleen. Postellus then gives, intestina, vesica, arteriae," the intestines, bladder, and arteries; Rittangelius
gives the same. Pistorius gives, "colon, coagulum (spleen) et ventriculus," colon--the large intestine, coagulum
and stomach. The chief difficulty is with the Hebrew word MSS, which is allied to two different roots, one
meaning private, concealed, hidden; and the other meaning liquefied. 48. The Elohim--Divine powers--not
IHVH the Tetragrammaton. *CHAPTER 6* This chapter is a resum of the preceding five; it calls the universe

and mankind to witness to the truth of the scheme of distribution of the powers of the numbers among created
forms, and concludes with the narration that this philosophy was revealed by the Divine to Abraham, who
received and faithfully accepted it, as a form of Wisdom under a Covenant. 49. The Dragon, TLI, Theli. The
Hebrew letters amount in numeration to 440, that is 400, 30 and 10. The best opinion is that Tali or Theli refers
to the 12 Zodiacal constellations along the great circle of the Ecliptic; where it ends there it begins again, and so
the ancient occultists drew the Dragon with its tail in its mouth. Some have thought that Tali referred to the
constellation Draco, which meanders across the Northern polar sky; others have referred it to the Milky Way;
others to an imaginary line joining Caput to Cauda Draconis, the upper and lower nodes of the Moon. Adolphe
Franck says that Theli is an Arabic word. 50. Happiness, or a good end, or simply good, TUBH. 51. Misery, or
an evil end, or simply evil, ROH. 52. This Hebrew version omits the allotment of the remaining six. Mayer
gives the paragraph thus:--The triad of amity is the heart and the two ears; the triad of enmity is the liver, gall,
and the tongue; the three life-givers are the two nostrils and the spleen; the three death-dealing ones are the
mouth and the two lower openings of the body. 53. God. In this case the name is AL, EL. 54. This last
paragraph is generally considered to be less ancient than the remainder of the treatise, and by another author. 55.
The Lord most high. OLIU ADUN. Adun or Adon, or Adonai, ADNI, are commonly translated Lord; Eliun,
OLIUN, is the more usual form of "the most high one." 56. Him. Rittangelius gives "credidit in
Tetragrammaton," but this word is not in the Hebrew. 57. Tongue. The verbal covenant. 58. Speech. The
Hebrew has "upon his tongue." 59. The Hebrew version of Rabbi Judah Ha Levi concludes with the phrase,
"and said of him, Before I formed thee in the belly, I knew thee." Rabbi Luria gives the Hebrew version which I
have translated. Postellus gives: "He drew him into the water, He rose up in spirit, He inflamed him in seven
suitable forms with twelve signs." Mayer gives: "Er zog sie mit Wasser, zundet sie an mit Feuer; erregte sie mit
Geist; verbannte sie mit sieben, goss sie aus mit den zwolf Gestirnen." "He drew them with water, He kindled
them with fire, He moved them with spirit, distributed them with seven, and sent them forth with twelve. Notes
to the Thirty-Two Paths of Wisdom 1. The Highest Crown is Kether, the First Sephira, the first emanation from
the Ain Suph Aur, the Limit-less Light. 2. Binah, or Understanding, is the Third Sephira. 3. Chokmah, Wisdom,
is the Second Sephira. 4. Gedulah is a synonym of Chesed, Mercy, the Fourth Sephira. 5. Metatron, the
Intelligence of the First Sephira, and the reputed guide of Moses. 6. This word is from ChZCh, a seer, seership.
Chazuth is a vision. 7. This word means "scintillating flame." The "Thirty-two Paths of Wisdom" refer to the
Ten Sephiroth and the Twenty-two letters, each supplying a type of divine power and attributes. In my
Introduction to the Kabalah will be found a diagram showing how the Paths from Eleven to Thirty-two connect
the several Sephiroth, and are deemed to transmit the divine influence. Some teachers of Occult Science also
allot the Twenty-two Trumps of the Tarot Cards to the twenty-two Paths. Unattributed Contents 1997 - 2001
Al Billings..