me he estado planteando una pregunta en mi cabeza, pero cuando la estiro demasiado se vuelve excesivamente terminológica sin aplaudir ni evocar a nada real ni innovador que realmente me deje satisfecho. La cuestión es la siguiente: Ha habido miles de religiones en el mundo. muchísimas han sido politeístas/henoteistas y relacionadas íntimamente con la asociación de “dios-elemento”. Dios del fuego, aire, montaña, tierra… y en muchas teorías científicas se habla de que al final son representaciones divinas para comprender parcialmente eventos naturales y aspectos vitales desconocidos. Entonces la premisa puede conceptualizarse simplificadamente en base a ejemplos INVENTADOS: 1. Dios A, de civilización africana, controla los árboles. Dios B, de civilización europea oriental, también. Por tanto, dios A y B son potencial o representativamente, simplificando, equivalentes. Es evidente que su representación e historia es distinta. Dios A puede haber nacido de "las entrañas" de la tierra tras ser expulsado con la erupción de un volcán (ejemplo), tener una hermana que odia a muerte, y ser masculino. Dios B puede ser femenino, hijo único o incluso materia primordial hija del vacío. Pero todo esto suele ser parcial o totalmente inventado. Las religiones jugaban con el conocimiento de los practicantes. Si científicamente se cree que los árboles crecen de la tierra, la religión puede aplicar ese principio (o no hacerlo). Además, tendemos a buscar explicaciones humanizadas y con personificaciones, por lo que si hay un incendio forestal se puede pensar que "el dios de los árboles ha enfadado a su hermana, diosa ígnea". Pero todo eso es contexto "pseudocientífico". Y realmente a estos principios divinos, según mi premisa, siendo identificados como superiores, poco les debe importar como los llamen los hombres. Porque si les importara, darían una verdad absoluta o algo así, no?. Por tanto podemos saltar al fondo del asunto. Si son representaciones divinas para comprender mejor el mundo, entonces realmente lo esencial eres tú. Y tu realidad material. Si tu dios impuesto te hace sentir inseguro, ansioso, nervioso, deprimido, pesimista, te incita a atacar contra cierto grupo... quizá debas cambiar. Pero al final se trata de ti, no de un mandato divino. Los dioses pueden entenderse como una forma de asentar y alcanzar nuevos conocimientos, y realmente su efecto más esencial se reduce a este mundo. Incluso decir que lo haces para ir a una realidad superior. Porque querer ir a esa realidad? porque tienes un cuerpo y preocupaciones y deseos que te incitan a actuar de cierta manera para ir a algo no asegurado. Por tanto, realmente las instituciones religiosas pueden ser muy peligrosas al permitir que una mala interpretación se extienda masivamente. Las religiones abrahámicas, por ejemplo, han sido institucionalizadas y centralizadas. La verdad suprema se la atribuyen a un libro sagrado, una figura sagrada o cargo religioso clave, y luego su Dios. Si se establece que solo hay una verdad, la dicta una persona, un libro y un dios inaccesible y esotérico sin la ayuda de las dos figuras anteriores, entonces se puede hacer mucho daño. Es como una monarquía totalitarista, en cierto sentido. Si el gobernante es bueno: el reino va en auge. Si es incompetente o cruel: la entidad política designada puede entrar en una decadencia vertigionsa. ¿Qué opinan?. Me interesa mucho saber vuestra opinión porque se me ocurrió hace unos días y me ha dejado pensando.

I don't know if you guys do this too, but I think Gemini is a good tool for doubts having some shortcuts within hermeticism, and I wanted to know if it's right to do this because I don't really see any major problems with using this tool if the intention is to gain more knowledge, but when it comes to occult knowledge, I don't know how much an tool search can possess about that knowledge. After all, I believe there must be some limit, since it's "occult" knowledge. What do you think?

Often times we hear that the cosmological model of Hermeticism is inherently eco-centric (earth is the center of the cosmos) however CH 15 explicitly puts the sun at the center of the cosmos, as stated by asclepius in his letter to king ammon where he explains the significance of the Sun, particularly in verse 7:

> [6] But if there also exists some intellectual essence, it is the sun's mass, whose receptacle may be sunlight. Only the sun knows .. . of what this essence is composed or whence it flows since by location and nature it is near to the sun. . . . {We, who are forced to understand by guesswork, do not observe it.}

> [7] But a vision of the sun is not a matter of guesswork. Since it is the visual ray itself, the sun shines all around the cosmos with the utmost brilliance, on the part above and on the part below. For the sun is situated in the center of the cosmos, wearing it like a crown. Like a good driver, it steadies the chariot of the cosmos and fastens the reins to itself to prevent the cosmos going out of control. And the reins are these: life and soul and spirit and immortality and becoming. The driver slackens the reins to let the cosmos go, not far away (to tell the truth) but along with him.

> [8] In this way are all things crafted. The sun portions out eternal permanence to the immortals and feeds the immortal part of the cosmos with the rising light emitted from its other side, the one that faces heavenward. But, with the light held in confinement as it shines all around inside the hollow of water and earth and air, the sun enlivens and awakens, with becoming and change, the things that live in these regions of the cosmos.

> [9] It brings transmutation and transformation among them, as in a spiral, when change turns one thing to another, from kind to kind, from form to form, crafting them just as it does the great bodies. For the permanence of every body is change: in an immortal body the change is without dissolution; in a mortal body there is dissolution. And this is what distinguishes immortal from mortal, mortal from immortal.

CH 15.6-9, Brian P Copenhaver Translation

I think it puts the living significance on Earth as it should, and it's souls of course ascend from the Sun into spirits (via mercury) that thus get put into bodys through the moon (in reference to the prima materia and classical correspondence)

The sun is thought of as the quintessence of the elemental cosmos, the animating factor of it if you will, the soul of the cosmos, the end point of the incorporeal, and the starting point of the corporeal, the middle point between the above and the below. classically the sun being the 4th (middle) planetary sphere of the 7.

where as the moon or sublunary realm is the corporeal and the sublunary realm is the material elementally imbued apparent cosmos.

The moon can be thought of a the Queen of Providence of the cosmos and the sun thought of as the King of Nessecity of the cosmos.

I was wondering if anybody else had more input on this line of thought as I'm trying to develop a coherent cosmology diagram, if people disagree with this take or understanding of my ontology, and can provide more accurate information.

Moreover I am looking for more places than either affirm the heliocentric position or emphasize the ecocentric position.

I'm new to hermeticism. I started with The Hermetica by Tim Freke, I loved it and found it easy to read. I moved on to The Way of Hermes - Clement Salaman because I see it recommended here a lot. I have no idea what it's talking about or what's even going on. It's almost impossible for me to understand what's being said.

Is there a way I'm supposed to interpret this that would make it clear to read, or am I just not educated enough to get it? Would you recommend something else for beginners that's easier to grasp?

Thank you

It said “say to yourself get out satan all day long repeatedly, and it will cure cancer. Love love love love”

I had a stray thought like this once and the fact that it popped up just took me by surprise. What do you all think?

When people ask me what I believe, I usually give them some long winded answer or tell them it’s hard to explain/understand… that sounds rude and demeaning tho and I think I’ve finally figured out not only how to explain it but that putting it into words helps me make it work better because I am conscious of it.
I would call it a combination of Gnosticism/buddhism/hermeticism.
Gnosticism being the belief, Buddhism being the action, and hermeticism being the tool.
If you are familiar with these systems, then this should make some sense to you. Basically how I see it, we are trapped in a demiurgic world with archons etc. and the goal is ultimately to escape using our divine light. The best way to exist on this planet though in the meantime is through Buddhism, because I believe karma is real, and Buddhism honors the divine light. Buddhism also teaches you detachment, which you need to not return to samsara. Those two beliefs alone leave you weak though, considering most other people don’t share them. Which is where hermeticism comes in and I have noticed it has truly helped me get ahead in lots of ways within this system and enjoy my time here a bit more.
Does anyone else share these beliefs with me? Would love to make some friends on the same wavelength.

So, the Three Initiates are Hermes Trismegistus! I mean, who ever pretended to be the three initiates meant it this way?

I explained myself better there:

https://www.reddit.com/r/spirituality/comments/1vqqz0m/could_hermes_trismegistus_meant_the_three/

hey hey yall! i’m a nineteen year old, bored at home, and i stumbled upon this reddit thread when researching the phrase ‘as above, so below’, i have no idea what any of this is, but after one google search, Hermeticism has peaked my interest. i thought it’d be fun if yall could give me some recommendations and suggestions of places to start my upcoming research on this philosophical topic. books, websites, videos, any and all would be appreciated.

thanks everyone :)

I'm very interested in hermeticism, it aligns to a similar view or direction to zen, dzogchen, Mahamudra, and taoism. I resonate on some level to all of those, but right now for me the tradition and culture seem to get in the way.

I do resonate with just sitting, but I feel doing just that is not enough for me. I need more to do than just zazen and Kinhin.

What do Hermetics do on a daily basis? What are the main practices that Hermetics specialize in?

Our research organization, The Sparric Institute, has published a few thoughts on the faulty western conception of time, as outlined by writer J.B. Priestley.

To quote The Premonitions Bureau, a book that in part digs into Priestley's writing, "[He] equated a strict, materialist reading of how time passes—each second of our lives flowing remorselessly, one after the other, until death—with the intellectual barrenness of capitalist consumption... He proposed a model of three concurrent times (the present, the unconscious and a collective unconscious)."

Why should we be limited by a conception of time that pushes inexorably forward? Well, we think we shouldn't.

Curious to hear what you all think.

>

>

Estou lendo Corpus Hermeticum por interesse e um dos conceitos que mais me chamam a atenção é o Intelecto.

Mas me surgiu uma dúvida: É dito que após a morte de uma pessoa, o Intelecto se separa da Alma (que por sua vez se separa do "Sopro" e do corpo), e essa segunda é "Abandonada ao julgamento e veredito que merece". Isso implica que o Intelecto não é inerente a Alma.

Eles não foram criados juntos? O que essa separação significa?

Gostaria que me esclarecem sobre isso.

I just had a question regarding the relationship between kemeticism and hermeticism and their view on afterlife.

Is Duat or the Egyptian view of the afterlife contradictory to the hermetic view? Can they coexist?

I’ve recently been going deeper into Hermeticism, alchemy and the writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus, and suddenly Jorge Ben Jor’s 1974 album A Tábua de Esmeralda feels completely different to me.

I always knew the album was special, but I hadn’t realized just how deeply its imagery connects to Hermetic and alchemical ideas.

The title itself refers to the Emerald Tablet (Tabula Smaragdina), the famous Hermetic text traditionally attributed to Hermes Trismegistus and associated with the principle usually summarized as “As above, so below.”

Then you start looking at the songs and it gets even more interesting.

There’s “Hermes Trismegisto e Sua Celeste Tábua de Esmeralda,” which directly references Hermes and the Emerald Tablet. There’s “Os Alquimistas Estão Chegando os Alquimistas,” turning the mysterious figure of the alchemist almost into a joyful Brazilian procession. And throughout the album you find references to transformation, nature, matter, spirituality, love and the relationship between the earthly and the divine.

What fascinates me is the contrast.

Hermeticism and alchemy can feel extremely obscure when you encounter them through old manuscripts, occult diagrams and philosophical texts. Jorge Ben Jor takes these ideas and puts them inside samba, acoustic guitar and Brazilian everyday life. Suddenly alchemy sounds warm, playful and alive.

And perhaps that actually fits Hermeticism better than it seems. Give it a listen!

I am studying up references of indigenous cultures mainly Yoruba and Mesoamerican cosmology. As I look into these topics I wonder to myself reading up Gnostic anthropology, is magic and science two sides of the same coin with different rules of physics?

I’ve been dabbling with the idea of hermeticism for a handful of months now and am starting to take it seriously.

From the general idea I have about hermeticism, it seems to make the most sense to me, as an operating system, so I’m going to start with reading the Poimandres, Shepherd of men text, by G.R.S Mead

Any tips? I know it all comes down to my interpretation, but I’d still like any comments, or feedback on your own journey as you got into this type of mindset.

Edit: Upon reading up to passage 8, it’s talking about elements, the logos of interacting with abstract concepts and finding the meaning in them, I feel like you have to already be insane to make sense of this, I love it

Hi everyone I’m a layman esoteric enjoyer. I subscribe to a non-dual pantheistic philosophical framework and was wondering if these ideas align with hermeticism or if the idea of one being all and all being one is not one in hermeticism.

Hello, does anyone know any good Spanish translation of the Hermetic Texts?

I know there are English recommendations in the FAQ, and I can read it in English if necessary, but Spanish is way easier for me.