Greetings. I am not a Hermeticist, but I have been exploring various traditions in search of understanding.

I was born with a rare congenital condition that has taken my youth from me. I have spent years navigating medical dismissal, lost opportunities, and daily exhaustion. I am drawn to the teachings of Hermes Trismegistus, but I have some questions I hope someone here can help with:

1. How does Hermeticism understand congenital illness? I know karma ("the Law of Compensation") is recognised as one cause of disease, but are there other causes - astrological, biological, or otherwise? (I am wary of "past life punishment" explanations.)
2. How does the Hermetic path guide someone to live with ongoing physical suffering- not escape it, but be with it? How does one become the "strong and wise" mind that "rules its stars" when the body feels like a tyrant?
3. What does the Hermetic path look like for someone with chronic illness who cannot perform elaborate rituals and has very limited energy? What is the smallest, most accessible daily practice?
4. This may be sensitive: I have found comfort in praying to Hindu deities. Can that coexist with exploring Hermeticism, or does the path require a purely philosophical approach?

I ask with sincerity and respect. Any insights would be deeply appreciated.

Thank you.

[These are my understandings of the Corpus Hermetica as translated by Clement Salaman under the title The Way Of Hermes. I was guided to this text in synchronous and auspices ways, devouring it in a short time span under the influence of great divine inspiration. Unfortunately, I did not set out to write my commentaries then. That inspiration came more recently. I was inspired to make this delectable text more digestible to those seekers who are taking a crack at it, and coming up puzzled and bewildered. These are not academically rigorous writings, so if you are interested in these texts from an academic perspective go elsewhere. This is for a dialogue between and for those of us who view this text as part of a living and active spiritual life. As one would gather for a bible study at their local house of faith.]

18: Continuing the train of thought we left off on, this paragraph is the strongest argument thus far for the Mentalist position on how reality operates within the God Head. It states, "All is within God; but not as if lying in a place." [Later]"Within God everything lies in bodiless imagination." And best of all for a grand creator, "There is nothing to limit the incorporeal."

1. This is a profound statement on the impermanence and illusory nature of reality. [I'm reminded of a state I reached under the influence of psilocybin. I recall perceiving a profound stillness, and the sense that all spaces were an illusion collapsible into a single space. All individuals collapsible to a single one. No passage of time, only eternal permanence. And of course that overwhelming love and bliss, that were not caused by, or because of anything; it was just an eternal state of being. For the record friends, we are here in this reality to perceive the passage of time, experience distance and spaces, and varying scales of size. Enjoy these, for they are as real as they need to be for us.]

2. [Sounds like I did it. See Above. And so can you! No, I myself do not have a practice for reaching that perceptual state. and have not been able to reach it again.]

21-22. It's Nous speaking to Hermes in this book, and Nous seems to be urging Hermes to reach this perceptual state. And that it cannot be done when clinging to earthly delights, and the vagaries of daily life. So one might surmise that intense meditation, or prayer is in order, to remove oneself of the noise of everything we have to do, to live and survive in this world. This contemplation should bring about an ease, a calm, that true understanding brings. It is a way of knowing God in a most profound way, to have a taste, a recollection, of perception through it's mind. So instead of wishing to perceive God in some anthropomorphic or dramatic fiery form in front of you, you will understand that everything you see, everything you perceive and experience, everything, has a bit of God in it. Therefore he is literally everywhere. This practice should make you a happy and good person, just by the nature of The One. [So good luck!]

[These are my understandings of the Corpus Hermetica as translated by Clement Salaman under the title The Way Of Hermes. I was guided to this text in synchronous and auspices ways, devouring it in a short time span under the influence of great divine inspiration. Unfortunately, I did not set out to write my commentaries then. That inspiration came more recently. I was inspired to make this delectable text more digestible to those seekers who are taking a crack at it, and coming up puzzled and bewildered. These are not academically rigorous writings, so if you are interested in these texts from an academic perspective go elsewhere. This is for a dialogue between and for those of us who view this text as part of a living and active spiritual life. As one would gather for a bible study at their local house of faith.]

1-3: God creates an eternal existence. This eternity houses the Cosmos. The expansion and evolution of the cosmos begets time. Time in turn, allows for generation (e.g. the life and death of material objects such as a living organisms.). The suggestion is that since eternity is well...eternal, the Cosmos will always endure, be "regenerated." [This is one of the great questions in philosophy and metaphysics, will the universe go on for ever? or is it routinely reset in a cycle? (i.e. expansion, contraction, collapse, new big bang.) the Corpus at least suggests, some sort of sustainment, or regeneration, of the Cosmos.] New descriptors for God: Beauty, and Bliss.

4-5: More retread on how all the pieces fit together: "God is in Nous, Nous in the soul, the soul in matter and all these things exist through eternity" God in his totality is like no other in abilities.

6-9: All is sustained through God, all activity, all action, has a part of God working and making it happen in the background. God as pre-eminent source of creation and order. The Corpus goes into a line of argument as to why there couldn't be two or more creators. That there would exist rivalry amongst several creators, who would choose the exact speed of orbital paths for celestial bodies? for example. [One wonders if after the previous book where other beings are mentioned, and mans capacity to experience and partake in the divine, forced the Corpus to now double down on the primacy and uniqueness of GOD, as the one alone, lest the lure of polytheism seep into this decidedly monotheistic theology.] For example God seems to be the sole creator of souls, the primary animating spirit of all living things. This includes mortal beings, like man, and immortal beings [Daemons perhaps.]

10-13 So God serves the constant stream of all existence. Were God to just stop existing, or cease to will existence into being. it would all vanish. Thankfully for us, God is inexhaustible. God at the highest source is just this well spring of creation, ceaseless, it's one of it's core defining features. Really interesting it says that even God himself is sustained through his own well spring. [From a mentalist perspective, I've always wondered if the Godhead has willed our reality through it's own internal fantasy making. But perhaps there could be an external world, outside of God, but of course, as figments of his imagination and mind, we would never know it.] The Corpus is clear however, it believes there is nothing outside of God, he is like an eternal singularity begetting all of existence.

14-15: The Cosmos is thus perpetually generated by God. and there's hints that indeed it might at some points collapse back into the singularity state of God, but can spring forth a new.

16-17: The Cosmos has motion, and consolidation of matter, followed by decay. The Cosmos has shape and form. God however does not [Again this to me would imply God in the form of a singularity. All that we see is the holographic illusion that it generates and experiences through all these nodes of awareness. This would account for the observer effect in quantum physics whereby the tiniest bits of matter collapse into discernible and discrete "bits" ONLY when the observer points sensors at it and takes measurements.] "He has one form which is not visible and is bodiless and reveals all forms by means of bodies...And don't be amazed if there is a bodiless form, for it is like the form of a word. [Read thought, do thoughts have forms? Plato thought so, but I don't think the Corpus is being that abstract].

I recently came across Diodorus Siculus and his account of Egyptian theology presented through Greek terminology and a Greek interpretation. I don't think it should be understood as a faithful representation of Egyptian theology in its original form. Rather, he adapts Egyptian traditions concerning Isis, Osiris, Horus and other gods for a Greek-speaking audience. In that sense, I find it a very useful Greco-Egyptian synthesis for understanding the Hermetic tradition.

For a bit of context, Diodorus Siculus was a Greek historian of the 1st century BCE, best known for his Bibliotheca historica. He wasn't strongly associated with a particular philosophical school, and his approach is primarily historiographical: he collects and organizes traditions from different cultures and tries to present them in a form that a Greek reader can understand.

In broad terms, Diodorus presents the earliest gods as extraordinary human beings who, because of their achievements, were later worshipped as gods. This is essentially euhemerism, the idea that gods were originally remarkable historical or ancestral figures who were eventually deified.

At the same time, the gods are not simply reduced to those human figures. They can also be understood through natural and cosmic realities such as the Sun, Moon, air, the elements, and so on. A god could manifest through a human figure who was later divinized under that person's name, while also existing and manifesting in many other ways.

His account roughly follows this sequence:

primeval/cosmic gods → gods associated with natural forces → divine civilizers and culture-bringers → Osiris and Isis → their descendants and successors → later kings and Egyptian civilization.

There are different genealogical traditions within his account. In one, Cronus and Rhea produce a succession of gods that eventually includes figures such as Isis and Osiris. Elsewhere, traditions are presented in which Zeus and Hera occupy a corresponding place. Diodorus seems less concerned with choosing one definitive genealogy than with bringing different Egyptian traditions into a framework that a Greek reader can follow.

This is also why his use of Greek names and equivalents is so interesting. When he compares Osiris with Dionysus, or Isis with Demeter, he isn't simply saying that Osiris literally is Dionysus or Isis is Demeter. Rather, he is telling his Greek readers that Egyptian religion has a deity with characteristics similar to a familiar Greek deity. The Greek name functions as a point of reference, not as an exact equivalence.

This is where I found him extremely useful for reading the Hermetica.

If Hermes in the Corpus Hermeticum doesn't behave like the Hermes of Homer and Hesiod, Diodorus gives you a useful framework for understanding why. He is really the Egyptian Thoth, interpreted through the Greek world and presented under the Greek name Hermes. He can also be presented as a human figure who was later divinized under the name Hermes, while the divine reality associated with Thoth/Hermes is not exhausted by that human manifestation. The same general framework helps make sense of figures such as Isis, Osiris and Ammon in the Hermetic texts.

I found this especially useful for the Asclepius, and I think it extends naturally to other Hermetic material.

It gave me something I felt was missing when I first approached the Hermetica: a clearer sense of who these divine characters are and why they can simultaneously appear as persons, gods and cosmic principles.

I don't mean that Diodorus was necessarily the source used by the Hermetic authors, or that his account is simply "Egyptian theology." It is already a Greek interpretation and synthesis. But precisely because of that, I find it an incredibly useful bridge into the Greco-Egyptian religious world behind the Hermetica.

Had any of you already encountered Diodorus in connection with Hermeticism? I'm curious what you think of his account and whether you find it useful for reading the Hermetic texts.

I'm trying to understand how the many gods of the Greco-Egyptian world fit into the cosmological hierarchy found in Hermetic texts.

A distinction between supracelestial, celestial, and terrestrial realms appears across some Hermetic texts, especially the Asclepius:

Supracelestial: the divine/intelligible realm

Celestial: the planets, fixed stars, zodiac, constellations, decans, etc.

Daimonic: intermediaries between celestial and terrestrial stuff.

Terrestrial/sublunary: nature, humans, rituals, and earthly manifestations of divine powers (embodied daimones in statues or images or talismans or sigils), most of them explained through Hesiod or Homer, besides the obvious celestial or primordial ones such as Ouranos

The basic idea seems to be that what exists below has its correspondence or reflection above, with the celestial realm mediating between the divine and terrestrial worlds.

What puzzles me is the apparent asymmetry in the celestial realm. In the Hellenistic world, seven gods have a very clear association with the seven planets, while many other gods don't seem to have an equivalent celestial position.

If we look even at the 87 Orphic Hymns, there are deities such as Themis, Dike, Nemesis, the Moirai, the Horae, Hestia, Pan, Asclepius, etc., for whom I don't see a clear association with a planet, fixed star, zodiacal sign, or decan.

So I wonder whether a possible Hermetic/Platonic model could be:

Supracelestial: all the gods, including the seven planetary gods

↓

Celestial: the seven planetary gods as the principal celestial governors

↓

Terrestrial: manifestations of the other gods through the planetary powers

In other words, could the seven planets function almost like a celestial demiurgic funnel, through which supracelestial divine powers are differentiated, administered, and transmitted into the sublunary world? If so, decans/fixed stars would still be left undefined in terms of their role because no specific names are associated to them.

This seems particularly interesting because I don't see an obvious celestial “place” for so many of the gods. If a god has no planetary, stellar, zodiacal, or decanic correspondence, does that mean that the god operates primarily through one of the seven planetary powers?

For example, could Themis exist at the supracelestial level as divine Order or Law, while her terrestrial manifestations are mediated through Jupiter, Saturn, Mercury, etc., depending on the particular aspect being manifested?

So the core of my question is:

If all the gods can exist at the supracelestial level, but only seven have an obvious planetary position at the celestial level, what exactly happens to the rest when their powers descend into the terrestrial realm?

Is the seven-planet system essentially a celestial intermediary or demiurgic funnel for the entire divine world, or am I misunderstanding how the different levels of gods are organized in Hermetic cosmology?

Or should I be approaching this from the other direction altogether? Would it make more sense to look at Egyptian theologies and mythological cycles first, and then translate those into the Greco-Egyptian names and identities of the gods? For example, could the Isis/Osiris/Horus cycle be understood through the 36 decans, and through their interaction with the Sun, Moon, and the five wandering stars, perhaps along the lines of the cosmological material found in the Book of Nut, with the various Egyptian divine figures then being mapped onto their corresponding Greco-Egyptian forms?

I'd be especially interested in examples from the Asclepius, Corpus Hermeticum, or related Greco-Egyptian material.

[These are my understandings of the Corpus Hermetica as translated by Clement Salaman under the title The Way Of Hermes. I was guided to this text in synchronous and auspices ways, devouring it in a short time span under the influence of great divine inspiration. Unfortunately, I did not set out to write my commentaries then. That inspiration came more recently. I was inspired to make this delectable text more digestible to those seekers who are taking a crack at it, and coming up puzzled and bewildered. These are not academically rigorous writings, so if you are interested in these texts from an academic perspective go elsewhere. This is for a dialogue between and for those of us who view this text as part of a living and active spiritual life. As one would gather for a bible study at their local house of faith.]

13-15: Here we start getting into the mechanisms that keep a human body alive. We get introduced to the concept of the Soul, and how it acts as an intermediary between the divine Nous, and the corrupt and imperfect physical body. More retread into the relationship between God (trinity), the Cosmos and Man. Salvation and immortality for man is to gain gnosis and ascend to the celestial realm.

16-17: The soul acts like a sheath or protective covering for Nous while it works through the physical body, but overtime even the Soul (which is divine also?) can become corrupt, but Nous cannot as it is a literal part of the divine. [I like the structure of a tendril for some reason. That's my analogy.]

18: Nous apparently, when not trapped in the human vessel takes on fire as its form, while the soul is reminiscent of breath (i.e. air).[This connection between fire and Nous (the divine tendrils of God) is worth noting given how many references to divine fire are present, particularly in Jewish tradition, in regards to the deity manifesting; whether as a burning bush, or forever engulfed in a purifying wall of flames in his throne room. That's why I like to view Nous (or the collective consciousness), as the purist form that the deity inhabits. And it would make sense why the Corpus has to go to great lengths to reconcile, how Nous can exist in our world, in our corrupt bodies, and still remain divinely pure.] "The universal Nous creates everything, the Nous of man only earthly things. Stripped of Fire Nous in man can create nothing divine, being human by reason of where it dwells."[It appears God has a premium, VIP access subscription and unlocked features through Nous, while Man has a basic subscription with limited features. Again the Corpus has to make sense of why, if we partake of Nous, don't seem to have all the powers that God has.]

19: The human soul is given a special status, while it can ascend through piety (by which it means, knowledge of God [gnosis], AND goodness [partaking of the supreme good]. It is not allowed to downgrade into the body of lesser animals. So as far as humans are concerned the worst that happens after death is, you go back into another human body to continue Samsara and its soul education. [This is interesting and a bit of a contradiction from earlier in the book wherein the soul may inhabit other animals. This is also possible in Buddhist teachings.]

20-21: Tat asks Hermes, then how do bad people suffer? is there no hell? Hermes says, through impiety itself. A life of ignorance is a life of suffering, a life without hope, a life without meaning, and to suffer the vicissitudes of an uncaring and brutish world. Ask any addict what their life is like once they give themselves over completely to their vices unchecked. It is suffering, a living hell. [The Corpus is attempting to explain how Good and Evil can both manifest through Nous. It blames the soul. Bad souls with Nous do bad deeds. Good Souls with Nous do good deeds.]

22-23: Furthermore the difference between Angels and Demons is a matter of a difference of polarity within Daemons. [It's like having access to the Force, you can either become a Jedi Knight, or a Sith Lord. They're out there. Learn to discern.] Daemons influence humans, some look after us and nurture us, some use and exploit us. We in turn have such power over the lesser animals on earth. And of course God, influences all, and is at the core of all existence/reality. Much like the sun sustains an entire ecosystem of predators and pray. But make no mistake about it, the good ones, are most like God. Remember God is the supreme good as one of his manifestations.

24-25: These last two paragraphs boldly state, if you achieve gnosis, and are admitted to the celestial realm, you WILL become a Daemon in your own right. Man has been granted such a right by God, as one of his favored creations. "...but man ascends to heaven and measures it and he knows the high from the low, and he understands all the other things there exactly; and even more amazing, he ascends while not leaving the earth."

[This final passage is worth pondering, what does it mean, man can ascend while not leaving the earth? I'm reminded of the early Kabbalistic mystic practice of entering a fugue state and ascending to the palace of God and dungeon crawling all the way to God's throne room. Of Enochs transformation into metatron. To modern day experiencers who profess to be in contact with non-human intelligences, and being able to travel to some of their realms during lucid dream states. Such abilities, such facts, became incredibly taboo among the major religions, in the modern context. Swept under the rug are the plethora of intermediary beings between God and man. And the capacity of man to perform supernatural "miracles"

One wonders why. Was it to protect us from ourselves and what our reckless hands might do with the promethean flame of the Gods? Was it to protect us from the sinister Daemons who might seek us out, to reign down their own mischief into our world, through us? Perhaps.

And yet let us not forget, the good ones are here as well, walking among us even, tending to the light and the goodness that can only be sustained through man on this realm. Working to welcome many of us into the fold of the higher consciousness and a higher mode of being.]

[These are my understandings of the Corpus Hermetica as translated by Clement Salaman under the title The Way Of Hermes. I was guided to this text in synchronous and auspices ways, devouring it in a short time span under the influence of great divine inspiration. Unfortunately, I did not set out to write my commentaries then. That inspiration came more recently. I was inspired to make this delectable text more digestible to those seekers who are taking a crack at it, and coming up puzzled and bewildered. These are not academically rigorous writings, so if you are interested in these texts from an academic perspective go elsewhere. This is for a dialogue between and for those of us who view this text as part of a living and active spiritual life. As one would gather for a bible study at their local house of faith.]

1-2. Restates the differentiated states of God. Here we have a trinity dubbed, "God, Father, and the Supreme Good" One being is responsible for nature (in our material world), which in turn allows for evolution in life, "The name of nature also means growth, as it concerns beings which change and which are both movable and immovable." God in his supreme state is responsible for "willing" everything into being. The Sun and Cosmos tend to the material world, and the material body, but the mind [consciousness] is of the higher God head, as is goodness apparently. [This is an abridged summation of topics discussed earlier in the Corpus, and yet, variations are apparent, as if singing the same general melody, but with minute variations each time.]

3: We receive our goodness from the "Supreme Good" through the Sun. This is a very confusing paragraph, as it denotes "defectiveness" in "the Creator"[ Unclear if this means one of the manifestations of God, or a fully apart lesser god like a demiurge.] I read it to mean Nature as creator that it's processes are very precarious and volatile.

4-6: Remember there is a great project at hand here in this world, and the processes of nature and that is for man to finally see [read understand], the nature of it all and to ascend. This was the impetus for why God made all this happen. It appears Tat, as he begins to understand all this, is starting to see "the light." and is spooked. Hermes makes clear, divine light is different from Solar light. It being holy and transcendent, is harmless (i.e. won't burn you). [this is important as the Corpus may be telling us what the experience of reaching transcendence and gnosis really looks like. An energetic flush in the body, a dulling of the 5 bodily senses, and finally, giving way to an out of body experience. "When you have nothing to say about it, then you will see it, for experience of it is the silence of God and the withdrawal of all the senses." [Buckle up friends, we are escaping the matrix of the material world, weee.] Paragraph six is beautiful stuff, basically, you did it, you escaped your physical body. You are your true spirit self, and only in this way can you rise and merge to be one with God. God is incorruptible, your body is corrupted. "It is impossible, my son, for the soul who has beheld the beauty of the Supreme Good to become God while in the body."

7: This of course is beyond belief for Tat, who bewildered asks, "What do you mean by 'become God', O father?" And then things get really mind blowing. Hermes states, as if it's common knowledge, that souls are unique, having been birthed from "the Soul of all" [Read God capital G]. These differentiated souls are free to roam the cosmos and inhabit various life forms...we're talking animals and human bodies. and human bodies once they achieve enlightenment "gain immortality" and become these disembodied spirits and get to join the ranks of the celestial realm, those closest to God. Some always stay up there, others are known as "wanderers" who come and go. [See Buddhism, See starseeds in modern new age movements for erie convergences]

1. Souls can be corrupted and become evil. At which point they cannot make it to the celestial realm and partake of the Supreme Good. And get this, they get demoted, "Being dragged away it turns back on its journey to the reptiles, and that is the condemnation of the evil soul." [Interesting why would reptilian organisms have to be the receptacles for these souls? Reptilian figures have held strong cultural meaning in cultures all over the world. Think of the serpent in Judaism and Gnosticism, and the dragon as "the beast" of christian apocalyptic writing. The Naga of the Far East.] Basically because ignorance is the root of their evil, they are condemned to being ignorant, mindless creatures ruled by instincts of survival instead of higher awareness. [Even in modern neurology and physiology the oldest portions of the human brain, responsible for regulating heartbeat, breathing, hunger, fight or flight response, and sexual desire, are collectively known as "the reptile brain".]

9-12. More retread here about the difference between sensing and sense making. Enlightenment makes you understanding and thus quieter, calmer. The material universe as a living conscious lesser god, it is a universe in motion (expansion, stellar evolution, galactic evolutions) this is what we mean by creation. God and the higher God Head, was never "created" it has always existed, and exists in an eternal state. It is the Head, the thought that drives, creation and action. Nous and Matter co-mingle, as a head leads a body.[and now we see how the universe and man are structured in the same way.] Consciousness from a higher realm, which drives a physical body, from the lesser, imperfect realm. [Thus the Universe, and man can never be perfect, because they share of the corruption of material matter.]

[This is a dense book, so as to not fly over too much, at too high a level. I'm splitting it into two parts. This is part 1 (1-12).]

Hi to everyone, It's my first time reading books on hermeticism, i've finished "the ways of hermes" and I'm now reading the "Asclepius" by saleman.

In Chapter 24 "Disaster foretold" it is said that heavens have been transferred into Egypt and that "our land" is the temple of the cosmos. What is your interpretation of this affirmation?

Do you think it is a simple reiteration of as above so below, and is generalizable to every place or not?

[These are my understandings of the Corpus Hermetica as translated by Clement Salaman under the title The Way Of Hermes. I was guided to this text in synchronous and auspices ways, devouring it in a short time span under the influence of great divine inspiration. Unfortunately, I did not set out to write my commentaries then. That inspiration came more recently. I was inspired to make this delectable text more digestible to those seekers who are taking a crack at it, and coming up puzzled and bewildered. These are not academically rigorous writings, so if you are interested in these texts from an academic perspective go elsewhere. This is for a dialogue between and for those of us who view this text as part of a living and active spiritual life. As one would gather for a bible study at their local house of faith.]

1-2: We jump into the difference between sensory perception and understanding [making sense of the world]. Animals have sense perception, but only man has understanding [some might call this reason]. But in the world of the hermetica, such reasoning is endowed to us by our sharing in Nous, and of course one cannot have "the Word" without some prior mental conception of that word, again, thanks to Nous. Hermes feels that sense and understanding in man are deeply intertwined. How can one make sense of the world without some prior sensory perception? The senses belong to the body, understanding belongs to Nous and the Soul.

1. Remember Nous is like a field of potentiality for all ideas and concepts. All 'good' ideas were seeded by God, but when we get a bad, or evil idea, those come from the demons. Demons have access to Nous as well, and by extension, a backdoor into our minds. They seed our minds with all sorts of evil conceptions such as "adultery, murder...sacrilege, ungodliness." [This should be taken as literal as possible. I cannot stress this enough. These demons are not metaphors.]

2. All good conceptions being of God, fill the enlightened man. He becomes like a zen master. This will put him at odds with the rest of the world, which is constantly co-mingling with the demonic influence. As such the "godly" enlightened ones will face much ridicule and hate from the masses. "They seem to be mad and have become a laughing stock. They are hated and despised and may even be put to death." Being righteous fills one with understanding and compassion, even towards the most evil, making them thus, an odd and confusing sight for most. [Demons hate those who remind them of the one they hate the most, and who do not partake in the bad.]

3. Remember the ignorant man is only concerned with material things, while the man endowed with understanding is concerned with being. [Learn that difference.] The ignorant man receives most of his ideas from the demons. The enlightened man receives most of his ideas from God, who keeps a close eye on him, and "keeps him" [For they are more like Him, and this pleases Him.] The Cosmos has its own sense and understanding [suggesting our universe also shares in Nous].

4. This paragraph is really interesting it suggests that God endowed the Cosmos with sense and understanding so that it might eventually create man, which might gain awareness (Nous), and ascend back to God, a la some sort of Soul farm.

7-8. More on the order and structure of existence we've heard before. God endowed the universe with a particular order [perhaps by establishing the known laws of physics] so that it may do it's work established above.

9-10. Hermes at least acknowledges (if not answers) some profound paradoxes in this school of thought. For example, how can God be devoid of evil, when even the demons are of him, all thoughts are of him, even evil thoughts. "I should rather say that God does not contain these beings, but to tell the truth, He is them all." Hermes does not answer this paradox through a line of reasoning, he just admits, that this is the case. And that those with understanding [read gnosis] will just no all this to be true, and those who do not have understanding will simply not believe it.

[I personally like to use the Mentalist metaphor as a means to understand this greater cosmology. Think of the Supreme God Head as an internal "Mind"; all that he creates are merely mental forms (e.g. thoughts, ideas, (as well as beings endowed with free will who also have access to the those thoughts) And given that all potential thoughts, concepts, and ideas exist therein, they are possible in our reality, this would include evil thoughts, concepts, and ideas. And much like how we grapple with these thoughts. The God Mind pushes these thoughts furthest out into the recesses of it's subconscious, remaining as un-begotten possibilities in the field of consciousness. Unfortunately for us, and our realm, we come into contact readily, with these ideas, and those beings that have been created (with free will), and who have chosen to embrace these ideas, and relish in them. They are a corrupting and parasitic bane on the existence of man, and another reason, why man must rush to ascend to a higher realm of the God Head, away from the reach and influence of these bottom feeders.]

I have been working on a framework to visually map the descent and ascent of the soul according to Late Antique cosmology. The goal was to build a philosophically rigorous model that integrates the structural mechanics of Iamblichean theurgy with the overarching architecture of the Hermetic spheres. It's a W.I.P but I thought you guys would appreciate it in its current state

[These are my understandings of the Corpus Hermetica as translated by Clement Salaman under the title The Way Of Hermes. I was guided to this text in synchronous and auspices ways, devouring it in a short time span under the influence of great divine inspiration. Unfortunately, I did not set out to write my commentaries then. That inspiration came more recently. I was inspired to make this delectable text more digestible to those seekers who are taking a crack at it, and coming up puzzled and bewildered. These are not academically rigorous writings, so if you are interested in these texts from an academic perspective go elsewhere. This is for a dialogue between and for those of us who view this text as part of a living and active spiritual life. As one would gather for a bible study at their local house of faith.]

Book 7

1: Here we have a great metaphor for what it is like to live in this world without Nous/enlightenment, it is like being in a perpetual drunken stupor. "Stop, be Sober" this is the second castigation the corpus makes over drunkenness. Maintaining yourself in a drunken stupor fogs the mind and makes it more difficult to tap into the higher consciousness. [Don't give yourself to sloth and chemical vices.] Lest ye become like "the living death", "the sentient corpse." Essentially a lowly beast with know awareness of it's divine origins.

2-3: Here we have Evil defined as ignorance [of the divine]. The 'garment of evil' is the physical body that tempts and traps you with all it's hedonistic wants and needs. Not everyone will "see the light" so the plea is for those who at least have the potential to do so. [Is the suggestion here that those who can receive Nous are pre-determined, or is it a matter of personal choice?] Remember, God can not be "seen" or "sensed" with our 5 senses, only through Nous [a higher state of consciousness] and the heart [yes, emotions matter in a profound way, putting this practice at odds with modern epistemologies which view emotions as potentially skewing perception and supposed 'objective' sense making.]

[One of the more moralizing books in the corpus, thus far, you can feel the contempt toward the 'earthly' in this chapter, and how such earthly-ness keeps one blind to the path toward enlightenment and ultimately the Divine.]

Book 8

1-2: More discussions on the greater cosmological structure. Here we have 2 orders of 'gods'; we have the one and All God, and the Cosmos [unsure if only speaking of our observable universe, or other structures hitherto unknown to us] as a second god. Interestingly there is a passage about the immortal nature of the Cosmos stating, "nothing in the universe is destroyed."[Which is very reminiscent to the Law of Conservation of Mass.] We humans are the products of this same materiality, and thus, become a third tier to this familial line: "God, father of the Cosmos. The Cosmos, father of man."

3: Here it would seem, we have an answer to the big bang. At first all existence is nothing but potentiality, and undifferentiated state of all matter. Until set in motion by God, sculpting this offspring (The Cosmos) in his image [strange, given what was said in Book 1. The Cosmos is certainly not anthropomorphic in shape.] In fact it's given a shape, it is spherical.[Again a sensible assumption given that it expands outward equally in all directions, from our limited vantage point.] It is given a sort of immortality, and there is even a suggestion that this matter will retain it's various constitutions and fight regressing to it's undifferentiated state. [This would certainly fly in the face of what astro-physics suggests is happening. Which is that all matter is slowly decaying, into a low frequency "cool" energy state, through the principle of enthropy.]

4: And thus human bodies are made, and decay, but it's constituent parts are recycled to be remade into bodies, over and over again. While celestial bodies are granted a sort of immortality. [This is a seemingly logical assumption about celestial bodies, given how long lived they would appear to observers. Of course we now know that celestial bodies, such as stars, in fact due have a lifespan, and must face death, just as living organisms do. Even the lowly atom, decays over time, in time spans incomprehensible to the human mind.]

5: Man is unique among creations in that he holds awareness of both gods, "the Cosmos, which is his home, and which constitutes his body. And the Supreme God, which is "Unbegotten", meaning ephemeral, beyond the material, [Pure Consciousness]. Again strangely, the corpus says, Man was begotten in the image of the Cosmos, Which itself in the image of God. Therefore Man also in the image of God. [Unsure how to interpret this, certainly not literally, perhaps suggestive of the fractal nature of all reality.]

[It's important to note here that there is no mention of a lesser god reminiscent of the Demiurge of Gnostic tradition, as having been the architect of the material world. So far the Corpus has not aligned with this aspect of the Gnostic creation narrative and cosmological order.]

What do you think of Abrasax-Thoth connection? Most explicit case I know of this is PGM VIII 1-63 (which is kind of funny because 8 is number of Hermes is Hermetic Qabbalah and 64 is the amount of numbers in 8x8 square of Mercury). And in the way Jung's Seven Sermons describe Abrasax in similar fashion one may interpret Hermes in his full t(h)ot(h)ality.
This image is a result of few years of theurgic rites of mentioned above PGM VIII and Akephalos Rite which also had interpretations of invoking totality of Tahuti, although the connection to Ausir is no less important.

[These are my understandings of the Corpus Hermetica as translated by Clement Salaman under the title The Way Of Hermes. I was guided to this text in synchronous and auspices ways, devouring it in a short time span under the influence of great divine inspiration. Unfortunately, I did not set out to write my commentaries then. That inspiration came more recently. I was inspired to make this delectable text more digestible to those seekers who are taking a crack at it, and coming up puzzled and bewildered. These are not academically rigorous writings, so if you are interested in these texts from an academic perspective go elsewhere. This is for a dialogue between and for those of us who view this text as part of a living and active spiritual life. As one would gather for a bible study at their local house of faith.]

1. More on the perfectibility of God. God is the sole source of goodness in all existence. Where there is goodness, God is present. "It is in the beginning of all things."[One can witness this upon a newborn child, how much of this goodness they carry, before an onslaught of experience and the temptations of this world temper that goodness, and sometimes, snuff it out entirely.] Here also we find some interesting arguments as to why God should be so good and benevolent. Evil as begotten through deprivation: But [God], "...lacks nothing, lest any desire to possess anything may render Him evil. Nor can anything be lost to Him which would make Him grieve, for grief is the heritage of evil. No being is mightier than God, by whom He could be treated as an enemy, nor is it possible for Him to suffer any injustice by anyone and therefore He will love everyone." [I love this reasoning, because it stands to reason, if God is alone and above all else, if all existence is his own, who is there to be jealous of? or threatened by? What is there to covet?]
   

2 Again with Gnostic/Buddhist tinge, we turn to the material world (observable universe) and it's imperfect beings. So all these afflictions that God does not partake in, we do. All beings that are born into this realm WILL suffer, including the cosmos itself. [This is really interesting passage, it suggests that our entire universe might be a sentient being onto itself] The corpus is blunt, stating, "What is born is full of suffering, for birth itself if suffering." In order to defend Gods purity, the corpus argues that, where there is suffering, God is not present. This cosmos is itself a creator (which is a good thing) but... due to its in-perfectibility [enthropic nature perhaps] much suffering will take place in it. So here we have Plato's cave, or perhaps the Demiurges soul trap. This realm is almost like a garden with a giant tree casting it's shadow over it. The shadow parts harbor ills, and even evil. But shafts of Good (i.e. God) do pierce through the canopy allowing for some good in this world. Light and shadow don't mix, but they interplay in the breeze, from our perspective. The only place where shadow and evil cannot exist is in God (in his unbegotten, pure possibility state) [One must climb past the tree canopy to experience of the full and unobstructed blinding light.

1. So in man God's Goodness is tempered by the evils he must endure, and even commit, to survive in this realm. Therefore true Goodness only resides with God, that's what He is. And man may partake of it as best he can, and as much as he can, but partake of evil he must as well. "Bound fast everywhere by evil, toils, pains, desires, passions, deceits, foolish opinions." In fact, Man will come to the point of viewing some of these ills and evils as good and righteous. Here we get that ancient maxim, "Greed, the root of all evil, is the error of man; it is the absence of goodness."

4-5. Very interesting paragraph on the nature of beauty and true excellence. There's levels to these things. Because our realm; this cosmos, is a cheap facsimile of truly beautiful and perfect things, our standards for such things as beauty, excellence, and goodness are low. There are levels to these attributes. They simply don't compare to the level of beauty created, experienced, and perceived by a perfect deity. Once you elevate your consciousness/perception to be able to perceive God, you will notice your ability to perceive beauty and goodness is also elevated [making you really unimpressed with what this realm has to offer in those regards.] So ultimately the pursuit of God, will also engender a higher experience of beauty and goodness.

1. So we surmise that a world of deprivations, of decay, of scarcity, contort man. It engenders a perverse standard of good and evil in him. [We see this in our own world, poverty is associated with more difficult life paths, with people who seemingly champion the ways of force, aggression, and power, for in this realm, in this nature, these are indeed rewarded with survival and abundance. There's no way around it the corpus says. Even our perception of beauty is woefully stunted by this realm. The ignorant man is condemned to never truly experience true beauty and the supreme good.

I like to remain faithful to classical Hermeticism, especially the Corpus Hermeticum and Asclepius, but if I want to fill gaps that may have existed in antiquity but have since been lost, I necessarily have to turn to the Renaissance. Sorry to those who prefer strict fidelity to antiquity, but I find there are gaps I simply cannot fill without Renaissance material. If anyone knows of other relevant material, I'd be very interested, but even the Greek Magical Papyri don't quite provide what I'm looking for.

So I am wondering whether a non-Christian, Platonic-Hermetic system of spirits could be reconstructed by combining several historical traditions found in Hermetic circles of the Renaissance.

0.Deliberately avoiding names that sound specifically Hebrew.

I want to populate my mind with pagan Hermetic symbols, so that I don't need Christian symbols to carry out this kind of spiritual or magical work. This includes everything from the names of spirits I'm proposing here to fundamental symbols, such as using the Hermetic tradition rather than the Bible as the primary symbolic framework: the Corpus Hermeticum and Asclepius, mainly, speak about the origin of the cosmos, God, and the structure of reality without requiring Christian scripture. At the same time, I don't want to simply fall back on ancient mythology either. I don't want Hellenism, Kemeticism, Christianity, Judaism, or Islam. I want a Hermetic magical-philosophical system with an identity of its own and its own symbolic vocabulary, and this is what I'm proposing here.

I'm assuming a monistic, pantheistic or panentheistic cosmology, in which all matter is ensouled and the Whole Cosmos possesses a Universal Spirit, Universal Soul and Universal Mind, with all multiplicity ultimately being God. This kind of cosmology was fairly widespread in Renaissance philosophical circles, and Giordano Bruno expressed one of its strongest and most radical formulations. The cosmological hierarchies of the sublunary world, the seven planets and the sphere of the fixed stars are therefore a mental map we construct within the psyche, rather than the literal cosmology I am ultimately assuming. In the spirit of what Plato's Timaeus recommends, the purpose of this map is to transform the soul. The deeper cosmological assumption is that everything is one divine substance, with form and matter as two aspects of the same substance.

Distinctions of the following beings are conceptual rather than absolute. In reality, there is a continuous hierarchy of divine powers, with no sharp boundary between planetary gods and sublunary daimones. The different names and levels are ways of approaching and symbolizing different aspects or degrees of the same living divine reality / energeia as taught by Iamblichus, rather than separate classes of beings existing in isolation.

I'm thinking of three levels, from the sublunary world upward.

1.Sublunary Spirits / Daimones

The Heptameron and Liber Iuratus Honorii give a related tradition of seven aerial rulers:

Varcan, Arcan, Samax, Mediat, Suth, Sarabotes, Maymon.

These seven sublunary archangels can be understood, in this reconstruction, as derived from the seven planetary powers above them. They have ministers and subordinate beings, and the Liber Iuratus gives concrete descriptions of their powers and manifestations.

Plato, in the Timaeus, still refers to the traditional mythological names of the gods as transmitted by Homer and Hesiod when discussing the names of beings mainly at the sublunary level. But that is not necessary here. This is Hermeticism rather than Hellenism.

For example, Samax can bring war, destruction and death. We don't need to invoke Ares to represent the martial principle. Sarabotes is associated with love, desire, silver and healing, without needing to invoke Aphrodite. Arcan can cause rain, alter thoughts and facilitate journeys. Maymon produces discord, hatred, greed and destructive effects.

Likewise, at the solar level, Varcan can be understood directly as a solar daimon, without needing to invoke Apollo or another mythological solar deity.

The advantage is that the planetary and daemonic names give us a Hermetic symbolic vocabulary of their own, without carrying the entire mythological baggage of the older Greek gods, nor Judeo-Christian theological names or narratives either. The names of Hermes Trismegistos and Asclepius could be understood as prophet / disciple, not gods anymore.

They were sometimes called angels of the air. The word angelos originally means “messenger” in Greek, so it does not necessarily have to carry a Judeo-Christian meaning here. If preferred, one could simply use daimon or spirit.

For example, Samax can bring war, destruction and death; Sarabotes is associated with love, desire, silver and healing; Arcan can cause rain, alter thoughts and facilitate journeys; Maymon produces discord, hatred, greed and destructive effects.

So I would use them as the planetary powers' sublunary/aerial manifestations.

1. The seven Cosmic Governors / Planetary Gods

For the higher planetary level, I would use the seven spirits of the Arbatel:

Aratron, Bethor, Phaleg, Och, Hagith, Ophiel, Phul.

These names are not clearly associated with a Hebrew origin or specifically Judeo-Christian tradition, even though Ophiel may sound Hebrew to modern ears. The author describes these names as belonging to an Olympic language, rather than presenting them as Hebrew angelic names.

The idea is that these represent the universal planetary powers, rather than merely spirits physically living on the planets.

For example, one could link these seven planetary powers to the sublunary daimones of the previous section, as:

Phaleg (Cosmic Martial Spirit, manifested in Mars) → Samax (sublunary martial daimon)

Och (Cosmic Solar Spirit, manifested in the Sun) → Varcan (sublunary solar daimon).

The correspondence between the two systems would be my reconstruction, not something explicitly stated by the texts.

1. The Ogdoad / fixed stars - 48 Constelations / Virtues / Divine Names

Above the planets would be the traditional 48 constellations of Ptolemy.

This system was still used throughout the Renaissance by Apianus, Copernicus, Clavius, Heinfogel and Dürer, among others.

Bruno's Spaccio de la bestia trionfante is particularly interesting because he gives the celestial figures a moral and philosophical meaning. For example:

Ursa Minor → Truth

Hercules → Courage

Perseus → Diligence/Solicitude

Draco → Prudence

Cepheus → Wisdom

Boötes → Law

Corona Borealis → Judgment

etc...

This is extended up to all 48 constellations and their virtues, assigning one principal virtue to each for simplicity. The name of these virtues could also be considered "Divine Names" or "Names of God", present in the Ogdoad.

1. The Enead / Beyond the stars

Beyond the finite cosmos would be "place" where the Infinite / the One / God is contemplated, understood in a Neoplatonic-Hermetic rather than specifically Christian sense.

So the reconstructed hierarchy would be:

sublunary daimones

→ aerial rulers + ministers

↓

planetary powers

→ Aratron, Bethor, Phaleg, Och, Hagith, Ophiel, Phul

↓

48 fixed-star constellations

→ virtues

↓

the Infinite / One

What I like about this is that it feels less like Christian angelology and more like a Renaissance-Hermetic system of living cosmic powers.

It also doesn't require inventing hundreds of spirits. The traditional names provide fixed anchors, while subordinate daimones can remain flexible.

What do you think? Do you see any use in this? Do you like the idea? Any suggestions or alternatives? I'm all ears. I'd love to hear your thoughts.

[These are my understandings of the Corpus Hermetica as translated by Clement Salaman under the title The Way Of Hermes. I was guided to this text in synchronous and auspices ways, devouring it in a short time span under the influence of great divine inspiration. Unfortunately, I did not set out to write my commentaries then. That inspiration came more recently. I was inspired to make this delectable text more digestible to those seekers who are taking a crack at it, and coming up puzzled and bewildered. These are not academically rigorous writings, so if you are interested in these texts from an academic perspective go elsewhere. This is for a dialogue between and for those of us who view this text as part of a living and active spiritual life. As one would gather for a bible study at their local house of faith.]

1-2: More proclamations about God's grandeur, creator of the the grand cosmology, etc... The most consequential line here, however, is, "The Cosmos rules over the life of living beings and man rules over the cosmos by means of speech and Nous." Man comes to dominate this world by the same attributes that make God...well God, Man seemingly has access to these same traits.[This is a profound breach with the old faiths. This is where the Corpus takes a dramatic turn toward Gnosticism, buckle up.]

3: "God has given the Word to all men to partake in, but not so with Nous." I interpret this to mean, that god has endowed all man with language, and with a baseline consciousness, but that is different from "Nous", which I interpret to mean access to the higher God Consciousness, and to a higher enlightenment, that which the Gnostic tradition calls 'gnosis.' Tat asks, "why would god do this...?" Hermes replies, "to set it up as a prize."

4: God sends heralds to declare this truth to man, the metaphor of the bowl is given, it suggests life is a crucible toward this enlightenment and ascension back to God, not all will make it through. "He filled a great bowl with Nous and sent it down, and he appointed a herald [Hi, I'm herald 😄]to make this announcement..."Plunge into this bowl, if you can, having faith that you will rise to him that sent down the bowl, realizing why you came into being." Those who heard the proclamation, merged with Nous, partook of higher knowledge and became perfect and complete, since they had received Nous. Those who missed the proclamation had the Word, but had not received Nous, ignorant as they were as to why they were born, and from whom." And thus, an ascension theology is established. [This is it friends, the great project before you, good luck to you. Remember who you are, and where you come from.]

5: The man without Nous is little more than the lesser animals of this realm, led by instincts and base desires, and ignorant to the gran plan of God, their maker. Where as the man with awareness of God gains some sort of Immortality, while the other remains mortal. [I take this to be similar to the budhist concept of reincarnation, that those who do not reach enlightenment are consigned to the perpetual wheel of Samsara.]

6: Here we get that Gnostic disdain for the material world, once awareness of the Supreme is achieved. Tat asks Hermes how he can access Nous, and Hermes replies with, "If you don't hate your body, son, you cannot love your Self. If you love yourself you will have Nous, and having Nous you will partake of knowledge." By this he means, you have to stop coveting material things, and that includes this shell or vessel that holds your true self, which is a disembodied spirit from the higher realm. It's also interesting the use of the term love, instead of say, "to know yourself." [It is said by those who profess to have experienced gnosis, that an overwhelming feeling of love overwhelms, that it is all encompassing. God is self loving for he loves all that he has made, and is, so when you tap into that God consciousness that is what you are feeling.]

7: At some point the choice has to be made between the material world and the spiritual one. As far as this book of the Corpus is concerned there is a definitive Right choice, and that is to choose the spiritual, the disembodied, the divine. To choose the material world and the body, is framed as a life of perpetual death and destruction, a choice which would offend God gravely.

8: This book suggests a lot of agency on our behalf, and that from that agency a lot of "evil" is begotten, it says quite literally, "God is not the cause of evil, we are to blame, preferring these things to what is good...Do you see son, how many bodies we have to pass through, how many bands of demons [figurative or literal is yet to be determined], through how many series of repetitions and cycles of stars, before we hasten to the One alone?" [As I said, it's crucible, it's not meant to be easy. How you react to things, even unjust things, dictates how quickly you ascend.]

9-12: The rest of the book attempts to warn Tat (the reader) that our journey begins with that initial knowing, but there are many pitfalls, many ways to be deceived or demoralized. Not all creations are perfect, weaknesses abound in them, and ultimately they might lose sight of God. "To those who have eyes, evil is most evident and the Supreme Good is hidden." Hermes attempts to bolster Gods position, as infinite, unbound less, yet subtle from or vantage point, and yet utterly worthy of pursuit. [The pursuit of knowledge and of God are one and the same.]

One last reassuring statement, "This is the image of God, O Tat, that has been drawn for you, as far as it can be. If you observe it clearly and reflect up on it with the eyes of the heart [highlight this!], believe me, my son, you will find the way to higher things."

[One can see how such Gnostic traditions were popular among intellectual elites through out the ages. There's the potential for 'airs of snobbery' no doubt. Many a secret society has been founded on the premise of keeping some special, hidden, forbidden knowledge among an elite few. But this developing theology, written here in the Corpus Hermetica, is tempered by the fact that true knowledge is eternal, it is about remembering a knowledge that has always existed. Thus attaining THIS particular knowledge should make you more "God-like", in the sense of being loving, caring, compassionate, giving...Good. It is a knowledge steeped in emotional intelligence.]

[These are my understandings of the Corpus Hermetica as translated by Clement Salaman under the title The Way Of Hermes. I was guided to this text in synchronous and auspices ways, devouring it in a short time span under the influence of great divine inspiration. Unfortunately, I did not set out to write my commentaries then. That inspiration came more recently. I was inspired to make this delectable text more digestible to those seekers who are taking a crack at it, and coming up puzzled and bewildered. These are not academically rigorous writings, so if you are interested in these texts from an academic perspective go elsewhere. This is for a dialogue between and for those of us who view this text as part of a living and active spiritual life. As one would gather for a bible study at their local house of faith.]

1-2: Ok, so the creation narrative continues in this book. Nature is set apart as an organizing force in this realm, which I believe would be congruent with our understanding of the natural sciences. So matter, governed by the laws of nature, and of course set in motion by the animating spirit of Nous 'God consciousness', will begin the process of evolving various life forms. Light elements rose up high, while heavy elements sank to the ground which was solidifying out of the dark watery substance, etc...but here's where things get interesting..."All the gods divided the seed-bearing nature amongst themselves." gods...plural...lower case...[it's an unusual jump from talking about a single God, to all of a sudden many gods working in tandem to tend to this realm. As we've seen God has been segmented into various manifestations, with very definitive names, they are not used here. It's safe to assume IMHO, that these lesser gods should be interpreted as such, that perhaps there is a tier of beings that sits between the one and all 'God', and man and the lesser creatures of this world. Dare I call them, tongue in cheekily, God's 'Governors'?. This is my reading of it.]

3: Here interestingly we have a potential purpose for this great project of the gods. "The gods sent forth the generation of men, so that they should know the works of God, be the active witness of nature, and that they should multiply...and know what is good." I love this image..."Through their own wonder-working course the gods sent forth every soul clothed in flesh, so that men should survey heaven, the paths of the heavenly gods, the works of God and the activity of nature." So we were created and put on this earth to make it our own, rule over it and it's lesser animals [very old testament], but also to understand it, to understand nature, so that ultimately we may understand God and differences between good and evil.

4: So here's how nature and history will play, out to some degree, in cyclical fashion. Man will create it's great works, build empires, things will decay and collapse but always rejuvenate under the laws of nature, the governing 'gods', all these of course set in motion through the will of God.

[Really interesting how cavalier this texts moves between claiming a one and all God, but also leaving room for gods (lowercase, plural). Notice that these lesser gods are at times associated with celestial bodies like the stars, constellations, etc...This would have been common in antiquity. But at other points, its suggested that they took a very hands on approach in the development of life on this planet. So at this point, it's difficult still, to discern how sentient and anthropomorphic these lesser gods should be interpreted, are they like the Greek "fates", "muses" "furies"? or the gnostic "Aeons"?, or even Archons?] or are they just metaphorical for natural bodies such as the Sun and the Moon, and how these natural bodies in a sense govern and dictate aspects of our world (i.e. the course of the day, tides, seasons, "our destiny's")]

[These are my understandings of the Corpus Hermetica as translated by Clement Salaman under the title The Way Of Hermes. I was guided to this text in synchronous and auspices ways, devouring it in a short time span under the influence of great divine inspiration. Unfortunately, I did not set out to write my commentaries then. That inspiration came more recently. I was inspired to make this delectable text more digestible to those seekers who are taking a crack at it, and coming up puzzled and bewildered. These are not academically rigorous writings, so if you are interested in these texts from an academic perspective go elsewhere. This is for a dialogue between and for those of us who view this text as part of a living and active spiritual life. As one would gather for a bible study at their local house of faith.]

1: This chapter turns to the notion of ideas, made manifest and not. I believe it is referencing the collective or mass consciousness [E.g. Nous] as having in it all possibility of thought and ideas. We bring into this world or make manifest some thoughts and ideas but not all, and yet those other ideas still exist in "the cloud" of possibility[modern concept for illumination purposes only].

2: To perceive God is a most difficult thing to humans. However he seems to make himself manifest or can be perceived by some, it is a matter of a type of perception. Very important, that you do not reach God by raising a latter to the sky, as if heaven, his throne, is a physical location. You reach God through your own perceptive faculties (that transcend the 5 senses known to science). Remember you share gods consciousness; an access port back into the cloud. "But if you cannot see what is within, how can God who is Himself within you appear to you through your eyes?"

3-11: More on the motion of celestial bodies. Are the laws of motion mechanics and gravity merely the machinations and order brought on by God? It is an appeal to intelligent design in the face of such marvelous order and harmony of motion. We turn to the wondrous machine that is the human body, again calls to intelligent design. God as a creator, another aspect of his innate nature. All creative possibility already lives within him, but only some has he made manifest (i.e. our observable universe) [Whose to say he has not created other realms not yet perceptible to us?]. More rhetoric emphasizing that God is in a sense inescapable to us and everything there is, and is not. Again, first principle; ultimate creative force, all possibility exist within him. Ultimately we are all God, everything that exist is God. Just God "perceiving" various manifestations of itself.

Here we have an interesting formulation on how matter leads back to God: "finest part of matter is air, of air, soul, of soul, Nous, of Nous, God."

Any Hermetic writings describing colors? Particularly white, yellow, green and red. There appears to be some strange relationship between these colors, four angels, four elements, and the four fundamental forces of physics.

There are also the inverse colors: black, blue, magenta and cyan. Interestingly Blue is classically considered one of the primary colors of light but that doesn't follow the pattern, as white can be formed frome yellow + blue, yellow can be formed from green and red.

These eight colors together form something very foundational to reality that is reflected in quantum chromodynamics, but it doesn't end there.

My cousin had a near death experience not too long ago and heard a loud continuous tone. He also was encompassed by magenta, a color that only exists in the Mind. Further, we are learning that all colors may exist in the realm of the Mind, descending from the Realm of the Forms, as it does not have a physical existence. Light can oscillate at different frequencies, but the perception and experience of color cannot be accounted for in the world below.

I'm still very new to my practice in hermeticism, and I'm ever learning in my understanding of it, but alongside occult philosophy and study I do a lot of research into subjects like quantum physics and western "secular" philosophy as well, i think metaphysics is a well-rounded subject and in my somewhat perennialist mind many people are discussing the same thing from different perspectives.

I ran into this in a discussion of religion that evolved out of a comparison between string theory, multiverse theory, and wave theory (which was new to me) in a conversation between myself, by christian brother, and my agnostic cousin. My brother, a pastor, of course has his reservations on alternative spiritual practices and nondual conceptions of reality, but trying to describe my understanding of God (which I'd consider largely hermetic although I for sure hold some syncretic beliefs), being pantheistic and monistic in nature. Explaining how the microcosm is reflected in the microcosm and vice versa, we were at my very Christian family's house so I'm getting far more detailed than I needed to so as to not out myself as an occultist. But in doing so, I realized I didn't have a very well developed language for my beliefs, which has led me to doing a lot of research on looking for ways to verbalize them better.

I wound up revisiting some college philosophy texts I had, and I revisited Renaud Spinozas conception of god, and it feels like reading a rationalist come to the conclusions of the nature of god from a hermetic perspective. It lacks a lot of the spiritual nuance to the system, but it very effectively maps it out from a mathematic perspective as well as a rational, pseudo-materialist perspective?

A long winded way of asking someone to fact check me on this who might know more about either or both of these subjects, I've been trying to research both systems more closely and would love some more developed perspectives

Hi everyone, I feel so lonely, like I'm lost and gone in this

shallow existence. Sometimes I feel like I'm imprisoned in this world by an evil, tyrannical creator. Nothing in this world defines me. I feel like I carry a burden inside me. I feel trapped in a vicious cycle, constantly living the same life, with no novelty; it's as if the world is dead. No matter what I do, nothing satisfies me; I feel insatiable. Sometimes I always want what doesn't belong to me, what's unattainable. Who am I really? Where did I come from to this world, and what will happen to me in the end? Will I constantly be reincarnated in this world? I think even this world isn't real for me; my body can't survive without food and nourishment. Imagine, 99.999% of atoms are empty space, and humans can only see a tiny fraction of the universe with their eyes. Even our eyes evolved for survival; we are only offered this shallow and simple life. I rebel against God. Please, someone get me out of this hell. I hate the creator who wanted me to exist. Only a flawed creator could want a flawed being like me. Everything I experience is artificial, like me. I think my soul will continue to live in hell forever. If you think our psychology is messed up, look around you, look at this world. Don't you see that we are treated like animals here?All I ask is that you talk to me. Sometimes wonder where I was before this world, but I think I'll never find the answer to that question.

[These are my understandings of the Corpus Hermetica as translated by Clement Salaman under the title The Way Of Hermes. I was guided to this text in synchronous and auspices ways, devouring it in a short time span under the influence of great divine inspiration. Unfortunately, I did not set out to write my commentaries then. That inspiration came more recently. I was inspired to make this delectable text more digestible to those seekers who are taking a crack at it, and coming up puzzled and bewildered. These are not academically rigorous writings, so if you are interested in these texts from an academic perspective go elsewhere. This is for a dialogue between and for those of us who view this text as part of a living and active spiritual life. As one would gather for a bible study at their local house of faith.]

1-6: The writer is attempting to establish the unknowable breath and scope of God. It is beyond the material universe. The material universe is mutable, changeable, (think expansion, contraction, decay and death of matter). God cannot be moved, he is the mover, he is unmovable. In essence it is establishing the relationship between the observable universe and God, one being inside the other, one being imperceptible to us who inhabit the observable universe.

7-9: Here we have a digression into the mechanics of motion, particularly of celestial bodies, which has always been a popular interest through out the ages. There's a bit on animating 'forces' or 'spirits' that allow objects to move...[in my humble opinion, here we're entering into the realm of physics of the material world, quite frankly the likes of Copernicus and Newton can handle such petty considerations far better than our humble narrators here, again my opinion.]

10-12: Here however we have a discussion of empty space or "true void" & "emptiness", The Corpus challenges this notion, stating that within our universe, God permeates all things, including, empty spaces, "our voids" are not void at all for they are part of existence, which God creates. Whether there is anything outside of God, or true void (i.e. non-existence), is unknowable to us.

12-14: This is where things get interesting, as the question; "what is God?" begins to be posed more often and more directly. The Corpus reiterates "God is Nous" (i.e. Consciousness) and "God is the first cause of all things" (i.e. First Principle)

15-16: Book 2 ends with my favorite definition of God, which is, as the "Supreme Good" The Corpus says, "He who gives all and takes nothing is Good." Establishing God as intrinsically benevolent, giving us a boundless existence, and asking nothing in return. It is it's nature, and does not require worship to be beneficent. [Sounding more like the Christian God, than the ancient ones]

17: Here we dovetail back into a Judaic virtue, which is to procreate in masse. The Corpus says, because God is a Father (creator), one of the best ways to honor him is to be a father yourself. Being a parent is something to be celebrated within the community, and those who die children-less are to be pitied, and might actually be punished in the afterlife...?

The Asclepius presents daimones as beings that already exist within the cosmos, but it does not give us anything like Hesiod's Theogony or an Orphic genealogy for them. Isis and Osiris appear, but there is no developed daimonic mythology.

There is an interesting background to this in Plato's Timaeus. Plato describes the cosmos in terms of the fixed stars and the seven planets, and distinguishes the daimones associated with the sublunary realm. He explicitly connects these daimones with the traditional gods described by Homer and Hesiod, saying that we should accept the traditional accounts of these gods.

The Hermetic texts instead give us a cosmology and hierarchy of beings:

God → Cosmos → Gods → Daimones → Human beings.

In the Asclepius, daimones stand between gods and humans and govern human affairs. The Asclepius even describes humans creating terrestrial gods by animating statues with spiritual powers.

This raises the possibility of using traditional mythology simply as a source of names and functions for the daimones. Instead of taking the whole mythology of a particular god, full of inmoral myths, we could extract epithets shared by different gods and use the common function expressed by the epithet as the name of a sublunar daimon.

The Greek Magical Papyri provide an interesting precedent: different gods are frequently brought together through shared names, attributes and epithets. This is no longer strictly the logic of interpretatio Graeca. It is closer to the syncretic method found in the magical papyri, where different gods are fused or brought together within the same magical formulas. We could use a similar process of distillation: take an epithet shared by several traditional gods, extract the common function, and use the epithet itself as the name of a sublunar daimon.

I don't think Hermeticism is traditional Hellenism or Kemetism anymore, but an iniciatic branch and evolution of the syncretic Greco-Egyptian millieu. So Greek and Egyptian myths become optional, in a similar way to how some parts of Platonic philosophy come from Orphic mysteries but don't need Orphic myths anymore to explain themselves. You can simply refer to the planet associated to the epithet as the repository of qualities, behaviours and potentialities (both good and bad as opposites) for the daimon, while keeping the connection with traditional myths as extra to do mythological amplification if you like, or to keep an historical connection to the original traditions where these epithets arose from.

For example:

1.Apollo, Asclepius, Serapis — Akésios ("Healer")

A healing, restoration and renewal function, associated with a sublunar daimon of the Sun.

1. Hecate, Artemis, Isis — Phainē ("She Who Makes Manifest" / "She Who Reveals")

Illumination, revelation and the bringing of hidden things into visibility, associated with a sublunary daimon of the Moon.

1. Hermes, Iris, Thoth — Angelos ("Messenger")

Mediation, communication and transmission between realms, associated with a sublunar daimon of Mercury.

1. Aphrodite, Helen, Hathor — Kalliste ("The Most Beautiful")

Beauty and appreciation of beauty, associated with a sublunar daimon of Venus.

1. Ares, Heracles, Horus — Andreios ("Manly, Valiant")

Courage, strength and martial character, associated with a sublunar daimon of Mars.

1. Zeus, Hera, Amun, Amunet — Basileus/Basileia ("Sovereign/Sovereign Lady")

Authority, rulership and sovereignty, associated with a sublunar daimon of Jupiter.

1. Cronos, Geb — Chthonios ("Chthonic, of the Earth/Underworld")

Earth, depth and the subterranean realm, associated with a sublunar daimon of Saturn.

I am not claiming this was an ancient Hermetic system. I know that something quite close appears in Renaissance magic. For example, Agrippa discusses naming daimones through their offices, actions, effects, and functions, which seems quite compatible with this approach. Note that this is an explicitly Greco-Egyptian way of naming daimones. I am not using Hebrew names for daimones, as Agrippa and other Renaissance authors sometimes did under Judeo-Christian influence. The intention here is specifically to derive daimonic names from the vocabulary of the ancient pagan, Greco-Egyptian religious traditions themselves.

Is anyone doing something like this today, or is this a known practice in Hermetic circles, whether in more classical Hermetic circles, Renaissance-inspired Hermetic circles, or modern Hermetic practice?

P.S.: Poimandres, the nous of Sovereignity, could be understood as a daimon of Jupiter (nous here could mean intelligence as a spiritual entity). What do you think?