u/Mister_Ape_1

There is a figure in Gnosticism I struggle to understand because apparently different sects of Gnosticism are contradictory about her.

I find Zoe is said to be either the daughter of Sophia, either one of the ~30 Aeons coming before Sophia. It is either one, either the other, it can not be both.

I also find she is linked to Eve, so is Eve her Incarnation ?

But it also looks like she is linked to Sabaoth after he learns about the existence of the Pleroma, rebels to Yaldabaoth and ascends to an intermediary realm between the Heavens of Yaldabaoth and the other Archons, and the Pleroma itself.

I struggle to see the same character as being implemented in 2 roles so different from eachothers.

And until now I just asked who is she. The final question is what Zoe is ? Is she the personification of life as in biological life ? If so she should be the daughter of Sophia, and thus not a proper Aeon of the Pleroma, because Sophia is the last Aeon afterall. But life is not necessarily biological life. It could be the life of the divine spark standing as a contrast to the Demiurgical Universe of matter.

And if Zoe is biological life, she should be represented as part human, part animal, even though Aeons are never represented as such and Yaldabaoth and the Archons are rather the ones represented in such way. Afterall biological life is shared by all creatures. But does Gnosticism even need a nature goddess symbolizing biological life ? I do not think so. Biological life as we know it is a creation of the Demiurge in Gnostic texts.

There is an issue regarding Sabaoth, the Archon of Venus.

He is supposed to rebel against Yaldabaoth, but in some texts after that he also becomes the God of Israel. However the God of Israel is the very inspiration for the Demiurge and his character. If O.T. God is not Yaldabaoth, it would not make sense.

The root of this confusion is likely the difference between Gnostic sects.

Is Valentinianism the sect with Sabaoth as the God of Israel, since they tried to bridge the gap with main Christianity ? How do they explain the God of Israel being also the creator ?

If so, who is Sabaoth in Sethite Gnosticism and other sects ? Does he even rebel against Yaldabaoth in the versions where Yaldabaoth is the actual God of Israel instead of Sabaoth ?

And is not Sabaoth actually Lucifer (when Lucifer is distinct from the snake, since the snake was an Aeon in disguise, and from Satan) since Lucifer is linked to Venus ? It would make sense if he is Lucifer instead of the God of Israel.

There is in many traditions a variety of mystical practices pointing toward the experience of the Absolute.

This "experience" appears to be found everywhere. Neoplatonism, Kabbalah, Hermeticism, of course Gnosticism, but even Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, it is an esoteric tradition that is common to every sufficiently developed culture, and it runs parallel to the main, exoteric, faith based doctrines.

At the basis of all these paths there is a journey toward the realization of the underlying unity between the Absolute, a principle beyond the personal God of exoteric paths, and the Self. It often involves escaping from the cycle of reincarnation, and meditation or other similiar practices.

It is surprising how people in different times and different areas with zero connection to eachothers reached the same endpoint.

But it is not impossible. For example, most people around the world have folklore about a roughly human sized, sometimes slightly bigger bipedal humanoid covered in black, brown or reddish hair, a creature who lives like an animal in the wilderness but has near human intelligence. Yet this creature does not exist. The closest thing was Paranthropus, a relative we may not even have met at all, and if we did, we only met it in the form of Homo naledi, a species currently undergoing reclassification, at the very very start of our own journey. But it was smaller than us and died off hundreds of thousands of years ago.

The true nature of the so called wildman is the wildman archetype of the collective unconscious. 

So esoteric paths are like Bigfoot : you find them everywhere, they are all different but still very close, especially if we go deep into the path, and yet you can not have any empirical proof of the truths they speak about.

There are consistent and precise accounts of meeting the wildman as recently as the 20th century and from both Asia and North America, yet, it does not exist as a living creature distinct from us. If you go deep enough you find out in 99% of places the wildman is spoken about it is just all folklore and misidentified humans, or even more often bears.

So the wildman made me find a possible explanation for this incredible underlying unity and the consistent accounts of the mystical experiences around the world.

I believe they are based on the collective unconscious and its archetypes. I am not a Jungian psychologist and I do not know which ones and why, but I really feel there is really something, just not outside of our incredible brain and the mind and consciousness it produces as an emergent process.

Look at NDE experience. They are often consistent and accurate too, yet they are just dreams. People who are dead do not come back, and the people who experience NDE never died, or else they would not have experienced anything at all. But the brains of people with a generally Christian background reacts to near death experience in very similiar ways. I believe it is because of the collective unconscious, too, mixed with the tradition they no longer even believe rationally speaking, but still remember deep down as they were taught when they were kids.

Since now Christianity is disappearing totally even as a cultural thing, at least in Europe where I live, and as a result Gen Z will not educate their kids according to its teachings, I believe in the second half of this century NDE patients will have different experiences, but due to the collective unconscious, I firmly believe some basic elements will survive the test of time.

I researched on primate cryptids for years. As a lower middle class, middle aged Italian man I never had the chance to do actual field research, but I did everything I could.

When I started I was believing in most of them, but over time I learned more and more were misidentified animals or humans, and were based on the collective unconscious archetype of the wildman, which results in wildman myths being found in 70% - 80% of all global cultures. This, not Miocene bipedal apes being still alive, is the actual reason every area has its own "Bigfoot". Miocene apes are indeed extinct.

That does not mean 100% of them do not exist, even though I reckon at least 90% does indeed not.

3 cryptids emerged over time as having an edge over the others.

Orang Pendek : This primate was seen by many people both between western naturalists and natives, and was always described very consistently. The natives do not see it as supernatural, but rather as another humanlike creature. And it is consistently different than Orangutans and Siamangs. It lives in one of the few areas where a large land mammal could still actually hide, too. Probably the single most likely real one of all primate cryptids.

Lai O'ha/Ebu Gogo : Rarely reported nowadays, the story about natives hunting them to extinction is actually a literary topos shared with other peoples around the Pacific and Indian Ocean. However on Flores island there is something more. A hominin looking exactly like Ebu Gogo was found by paleoanthropologists. While it is quite likely to have survived until historical memory could have registered it, rather than going extinct 40 kya as it is officially believed, it is not very likely to be currently living; however in the southern part of the island, where it is known as Lai O'ha, the Nage people still assert it is around, and it is a living creature with no supernatural mumbo jumbo around.

Otang : A little known cryptid, extremely realistical because it is reported only in Knysna forest, a closed, remote area with very thick woods, and it matches the description of Paranthropus robustsus, a fossil species from the area. With Homo naledi recently undergoing a possible reclassification as a Paranthropus species, it would mean this line of hominins survived at least until 300 kya rather than 1 mya as it was previously believed. The bad about it ? Only one western research ever mentioned it.

As you can see only Southeast Asia and Sub Saharan Africa actually have non human apes. This is not surprising honestly.

But could there be other ones on the same level of likeliness to be real ?

I feel some of those from Central African forest could have a shot. It feels like a good place to hide an unknown ape.

Do you know any other primate cryptid you rationally reckon to be more realistic than the rest and on par with the 3 I mentioned ?

Before 1945 we only knew Gnosticism by the portrayal of its Catholic adversaries.

While a Gnostic disposition remained in some spiritual seekers (look at Meister Eckhart the 14th century heretic), 2nd century Gnosticism from Alexandria pretty much vanished for a long time.

Then we discovered the actual Gnostic texts in Nag Hammadi. We learned the cosmogony and philosophy of Gnosticism. But there is an issue...

As a spiritual rather than religious path, Gnosticism employed tecniques comparable, most likely, to Buddhist meditation, but definitely distinct in nature, in order to ascend toward the Absolute.

But what do we know about their spiritual practices ?

Without the daily practice, you can be a philosopher with a heavy Gnostic influence, but you can not be a full Gnostic. I know because while I am a Catholic, it was not my first religion. Between 14 and 17 I regarded myself as a Buddhist, and yet, I was just a New Age random seeker with no actual spirituality. I just believed in Mahayana Buddhism cosmology and philosophy, but I did not perform any practice at all. As it turned out after my conversion to Catholicism, I am not even able to enter the simplest state of meditation for the shortest time. I can pray, but I can not even pray for that long, and I need to talk or the prayer does not take place, as if it was actually magic. I can not hear the words in my mind, they vanish after 10 seconds, I can not focus and I can not do internal prayer. But just praying with my voice in Catholicism is enough. No need to think about any other practice.

I was not a true Buddhist even if it was not even my fault and I did indeed want to be one.

I ask myself if we know enough about Gnosticism, now, for people who want to be true Gnostics.

P.S. And I do not like the methodology of reconstructionist Paganism. I feel like they are LARPers. I can not see the difference between modern Paganism from people who lost that tradition totally such as Americans, and Anime cosplay groups. I do not think Gnosticism is anything like that at all, anyway.

I also feel you should not believe in Gnosticism and employ say Zen practices. Spirituality of humans is one, but the different paths to the same destination still resonate better with their own practices. I reckon however Hermeticist practices to be very close to what Gnosticism had to be.

There is an issue all ancient western systems where planets have a role share : until 16th century, the West was unaware of the Universe beyond the Solar System.

As a result, systems such as Gnosticism and Hermeticism give a big role to those few planets orbiting around the sun, and most of them saw the sun itself as one of the planets orbiting around the Earth. While ancient Greeks already discovered size and shape of the Earth with accuracy, no one realized the sun is millions of times bigger and the stars are trillions of other suns. And they believed the Universe to be limited in size. As a result, they believed Yaldabaoth/Platonic Demiurge/Bible God to dwell just beyond the dome shaped, physical barrier right beyond the orbit of Saturn. In reality that area is where the orbits of Uranus and Naptune are found, and there is no physical dome enclosing the Universe.

This is an issue for Gnosticism especially. Or at least it is for literal Gnostics. For psychological Gnostics it is not obviously, but I would say even a myth used to represent a concept needs to make sense in its own way.

There are 2 different, both very problematic ways to confront the issue :

1. Yaldabaoth created the whole Universe with trillions of stars.

Counterpoint : Why he only created 7 Archons, for Mercury, Venus, Sun, Moon, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn ? Why are not there trillions of Archons for trillions of planets ? Maybe because to humans other planets are totally out of reach and thus irrelevant ?

2. Yaldabaoth created only the Solar System.

Counterpoint : If he fell from the Pleroma and found the Universe already there, and he just created his own star system, who created the rest of the Universe ?

How do I believe the issue should be solved ?

Since Yaldabaoth is the personification of the Ego, our mind that produces our own experience and reflects reality in a flawed, ignorant way, he should be represented in myth as the creator of everything we perceive to exist now. This extends his reach to 93 billions of light years, the observable Universe, and gives him power over not only the 3 spatial dimensions, but also over 1 temporal dimension. If the Universe is say another 256 times bigger, it does not matter, because our mind can not perceive the existence of what is beyond the observable part of the Universe.

This also means Heavens can not sit somewhere in the 3 dimensions because while we do not know what is found in every corner of the observable Universe, now we know it is all planets and stars. Heavens in Gnosticism however can not be just beyond physical dimensions because it was still understood as the creation of a mundane god. Being beyond dimensionality altogether is reserved to the Pleroma. This way, Heavens, where Yaldabaoth dwells with the Angels and the 7 Archons/Archangels, becomes a higher spatial dimension, a concept some fringe physicians even considered, even though it was ultimately rejected. However, if actual science considered it for a while, it means as a concept it is not just ridiculous.

What do you think ? What is the most consistent way to understand Gnosticism with the new astronomical discoveries ?

P.S. Since Yaldabaoth crafted the Universe from pre-existing matter, he did not just will reality into existence ex nihilo. Like in Platonism, there is no creation ex nihilo in Gnosticism. This means he actually has control over 4 spatial dimensions, our 3 ones + the extra one Heavens is placed in beyond our Universe, but he has no control over time, because crafting the spatial dimensions does not implicate any relation to the temporal dimension. Creation ex nihilo from Christianity on the other hand implies a Big Bang-like event and the creation of time also, since ex nihilo means there had to be no time before.

This is the set of archons already posted in this subreddit :

1 Saturn - Athoth - ♄ associated with the signs Capricorn and Aquarius. He is the sheep-faced archon who rules over deception.

2 Jupiter - Harmas, Eloaiou - ♃ conjunct Sagittarius and Pisces. He is the donkey-faced archon who rules over injustice.

3 Mars - Kalila Oumbri, Astaphaios - ♂︎ conjunct Aries and Scorpio. He is the hyena-faced archon who rules over anger.

4 Sol - Yabel, Yao - ☉ embodies the Sun and is connected to Leo. It is the 7-headed serpent which rules over pride.

5 Venus - Adonaiou, Sabaoth - ♀︎ associated with Taurus and Libra. He is the dragon-faced archon who rules over lust.

6 Mercury - Cain, Adonin - ☿ conjunct Gemini and Virgo. He is the monkey-faced archon who rules over greed.

7 Luna - Abel, Sabbede - ☽ embodies the Moon and is associated with Cancer. It is the fire face which rules over inconstancy.

I have a few questions.

First, is this the set from Sethite Gnosticism ?

Then, they seem Egyptianlike humanoids with animal heads, but why one has (7) snake head(s) while another one has a dragon head ? Is it not somekind of repetition ? Since the dragon is not an animal, could Sabaoth's dragon head mean something else ?

Then I noticed one is monkey headed. Could this be an influence from Sun Wukong or Hanuman ? Gnosticism has very likely influence from an early spreading of Mahayana Buddhism. Sun Wukong as we know him is quite recent, but a monkey Buddhist deity is likely as ancient as China's contact with Buddhism.

Finally, while I understand Gnosticism in a 100% Jungian sense, and as a Catholic I could either do that either ignore it altogether afterall, I wonder if Gnosticism has myths about the Archons impregnating human women. Could in Gnostic mythology Adonin impregnate women and create a race of Archon-powered monkey men ? And what kind of monkey does the head of Adonin represent ? Is it gelada baboon ?

In a Jungian sense, the monkey represent the unfocused mind that goes from thought to thought, and ends up circling around without making progress.

But the monkey or more accurately the ape is also the real, physical representation of the archetype of the wildman. The wildman is a strong, ancient archetype present in any culture. It can be also represented by bears, such as in Central Asia, in areas where there are no non human primates. It symbolizes mankind in its natural, pre-cultural state.

This is the set of archons already posted in this subreddit :

1 Saturn - Athoth - ♄ associated with the signs Capricorn and Aquarius. He is the sheep-faced archon who rules over deception.

2 Jupiter - Harmas, Eloaiou - ♃ conjunct Sagittarius and Pisces. He is the donkey-faced archon who rules over injustice.

3 Mars - Kalila Oumbri, Astaphaios - ♂︎ conjunct Aries and Scorpio. He is the hyena-faced archon who rules over anger.

4 Sol - Yabel, Yao - ☉ embodies the Sun and is connected to Leo. It is the 7-headed serpent which rules over pride.

5 Venus - Adonaiou, Sabaoth - ♀︎ associated with Taurus and Libra. He is the dragon-faced archon who rules over lust.

6 Mercury - Cain, Adonin - ☿ conjunct Gemini and Virgo. He is the monkey-faced archon who rules over greed.

7 Luna - Abel, Sabbede - ☽ embodies the Moon and is associated with Cancer. It is the fire face which rules over inconstancy.

I have a few questions.

First, is this the set from Sethite Gnosticism ?

Then, they seem Egyptianlike humanoids with animal heads, but why one has (7) snake head(s) while another one has a dragon head ? Is it not somekind of repetition ? Since the dragon is not an animal, could Sabaoth's dragon head mean something else ?

Then I noticed one is monkey headed. Could this be an influence from Sun Wukong or Hanuman ? Gnosticism has very likely influence from an early spreading of Mahayana Buddhism. Sun Wukong as we know him is quite recent, but a monkey Buddhist deity is likely as ancient as China's contact with Buddhism.

Finally, while I understand Gnosticism in a 100% Jungian sense, and as a Catholic I could either do that either ignore it altogether afterall, I wonder if Gnosticism has myths about the Archons impregnating human women. Could in Gnostic mythology Adonin impregnate women and create a race of Archon-powered monkey men ? And what kind of monkey does the head of Adonin represent ? Is it gelada baboon ?

In a Jungian sense, the monkey represent the unfocused mind that goes from thought to thought, and ends up circling around without making progress. That is why I am named Mister Ape, and also because I am a strong believer in science who identifies as being "only" an ape.

But the monkey or more accurately the ape is also the real, physical representation of the archetype of the wildman. The wildman is a strong, ancient archetype present in any culture. It can be also represented by bears, such as in Central Asia, in areas where there are no non human primates. It symbolizes mankind in its natural, pre-cultural state. Some think it originated when we met other species. When we originated 300kya in Southeast Africa we met Homo naledi, a species that has now been reassigned to genus Paranthropus, not yet officially but soon to be. Is likely a descendant of Paranthropus robustus with some Homo ergaster admixture. Basically a real apeman, way more primitive than any other African hominin of the time.

Paranthropus had a humanoid bodybuild and a gorillalike head. It was somehow like Bigfoot, but real, and 2 - 3 feet shorter.

If Paranthropus/Homo naledi is at the root of the root of the simian archetype, it is also at the root of this Archon.