reply to post by Masonic Light
For example, why would Mithraic priests like the Magi seek "the King of Jews" in order to "worship him"
Frankly, i think the entire story is allegory, and only later historicized to make it appeal to the masses (who of course, are known to take the
mythos as literal)...
So, i dont think Magi or 3 persian kings came from the orient when Jesus was born. I think the gifts spoken about have the same estorric menaing as
the concept of "gifts" - matoth - has in the biblical account where Abraham gives gifts to the sons of keturah. In this sense, the kabbalists
interpret matoth as esoteric wisdom.
So, the gifts which the persian magi gave to the infant Jesus (or nascent religion) would naturally be interpreted as esoteric wisdom. And indeed, we
see a great deal of zoroastrianism/persian influence in the Christian faith.
Now, my memory of the New Testament is shabby. I havent read it in many years. Were the gifts mentioned? If they were, this too has some hidden
significance.
Did they consider Christ to be the incarnation of Ahura Mazda or Mithras?
Well, if its entirely historical, which is what it probably isnt, then Jesus would be the metaphorical reincarnation Mithras. Ahura Mazda, from what i
understand about zoroastrianism, is akin to the gnostic Abraxas. Whereas Ormuzd and Ahriman correspond to the later gnostic G-d (of the bible) and the
devil, both of which are thought of as only half the picture, whereas Ahura Mazda is the 'unus mundus'... Jesus would then be similar to Mithras who
slays the 'bull' - that lower consciousness which percieves good and evil, and then eats its flesh.
Certain motifs in the Jesus myth like him being nailed to a cross (physical reality) to arise three days later (hinting at a synthesis) describes a
similar reality. The body - Jesus - is still completely rooted (or nailed) to the physical, but spiritually he effects a 'unification' between the
physical and the spiritual, and this gives birth to "christ", the transcendent function of CG Jung, which harmonizes the opposites.
This then means one can feed each part. The animal - the body - with its animal needs, and the spirit with its moral/philosophical needs.
Anyways, thats my take on Christianity/Mithras and the connections between both.
since many Gnostic cults considered the Jewish God to be demonic, and not the "Father" that Christ referred to.
Well, lets not forget the mileu that the gnostics - who sympathized with hellenistic thought - were living in. At that time the Jews were hated for
their revolts against the Roman empire. And this brought alot of sufferring on the native inhabitants - Jews - of Judea. So, there was a great deal of
animosity for the Jews, and the Jewish religion from the Romans. And with the success of Titus' destroying the 2nd temple, and the success of Hadrians
suppression of the Bar Khoba revolt, it gave them a natural feeling of hubris.
But, in what sense can the Jewish G-d be a "demon"? Someone who thinks that understands nothing of Jewish/Kabbalistic thought, and so cant really
understand the context behind that gnostic saying.
There are two main names for G-d in the Bible. YHVH and Elohim. Which one is being called a Demon? Surely, if the bible uses two different names, its
referring to two different things, or aspects of G-d. Elohim - translated as 'gods' or 'powers' refers to the law and order of reality. These are the
'gods' of pagan mythology. Only referred to as a collective, which is why Elohim is mostly understood (despite it being grammatically plural) as
singular.
YHVH - the G-d of Israel (its also important to note that this name is often combined with Elohim) is probably what the gnostic called a 'demon'.
Strange, i would say. This name literally means "being", and also suggests "eternity", because within its 3 unique letters the words Haya, Hoveh and
Yehi - was, is and will be, can be spelt.
This name overcomes the lower name. It is this name which is called the name of Mercy - because one who seeks to commune with the creator of reality -
the ein sof - can speak to him through prayer. Such human supplication elicts a response from the infinite - the eternal. This name is what has
purpose for this world. It gives meaning to both the person and external reality.
And this name is a "demon"? The gnostics really dont make any sense when they say that, and they say that knowing that their followers - being
ignorant of these basic philosophical/kabbalistic meanings - wont be able to properly interpret that statement. Suggesting that he is some figment
created by the human imagination - a "demented Archon" as the gnostics called Him - giving man the impression of having created the world, and given
man a fixed, moral law, undermines the entire tone, and significance of the Torah. Elohim already signifies the natural order, ie; the gods of the
pagans. YHVH symbolizes a higher order. And gnosticism? seeks nothing more then to return to the lower order of Elohim - with its inherent dualism.
But, you could probably say that Jesus - an archetype (or an idol, when worshipped) - replaces the figure of YHVH (who is beyond all defition, beyond
on all picture, ie; it seeks to maintain the separation between man - the creature - and G-d, the creator) and symbolizes this Elohim incarnated in
man - the dualism of the natural world, embodied in the physical man.......thus necessitating "man" becoming the New Elohim (as the serpent tells Eve
"you are Elohim")....
Im not sure i like this whole philosophy, since it has nothing, as you yourself acknowledged, to do with traditional Judaism/Hebrew Bible. It is a
pagan belief with cognates in Greece, Babylon, Egypt, Persia and India, with only minor differences.
edit on 2-6-2011 by dontreally because:
(no reason given)
