7 demons in Book "Gospel of Mary" aka -- the Gospel of Mary of Magdala

OneOff

OneOff

Member
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Points
0
The reason I didnt put this in the Christian forum is not important.
I want to share a short passage from a Book entitled "Gospel of Mary" (aka --the Gospel of Mary of Magdala). Magdalena, MARY from the Lost Gospels:
The first form is darkness, the second desire, the third ignorance, the fourth is the excitement of death, the fifth is the kingdom of the flesh, the sixth is the foolish wisdom of flesh, the seventh is the wrathful wisdom
Click to expand...
I am not sure I understand this. These seem far too abstract in designation to even be 'Demons'? Gnostics had no concept of "hell". Where is the Lord of the Living and the Dead (ex. Yama)?​
 
Last edited:
The rest of the passage at the end says:
....These are the seven {powers} of wrath."
Click to expand...
Maybe post the whole section of the little book of Mary, & reframe your question, or statement, or whatever it is you are trying to get across.

To me it reads a bit like the Tibetan book of the Dead.
 
Some degree of Buddhistic influence on Gnostic texts like these is not implausible. Ashoka sent out missionaries in all directions, and while they didn't have much lasting impact in the West, they were known. Clement of Alexandria mentions Buddhist teachers in Egypt, and says they had gotten as far as Britain (!) where they were somewhat popular.
 
bob x said:
Some degree of Buddhistic influence on Gnostic texts like these is not implausible ..were somewhat popular.
Click to expand...

I am the curious type.
Click to expand...

My answer to both is in no particular order ...

I have been spread out at many ex-christian websites. That may be influencing me on some level. No offensive to anybody,. I think my use of "Yama" tips my hand. From a larger perspective, I simply feel it is our duty to "know" religion. The problem with that goal is there is a lot of it to know :~ Honestly, In Western and Christian religions there aint a good record of exploring "hard to understand things". If aint consecrated via the Abrahamic faith on right down to christianity .Very little time spent on it. Unlocking the meaning and understanding of a Gnostic text I do not think was a large priority way back when. (No offense).
The parallelism between the Bardo Thödol [Tibetan Bardo] and this Gnostic work I think are interesting but far to surfacey and high ordered . . . IMHO, It might not seem obvious but someone should consider writing a work on paralleling Ancient Eqyptian Religion and Tibetan Buddhism and especially Theravada Buddhism. The Gnostic work did not have any place in what was to become the establishment.
People make the mistake of assuming it was a personality war or a power struggle. I do not think that is the case when there is the whole "teaching" matter. Usually Gnostic works have hidden and hard to understand portions which eventually tips the scales to non-canonical in the historical analysis
 
The first form is darkness, the second desire, the third ignorance, the fourth is the excitement of death, the fifth is the kingdom of the flesh, the sixth is the foolish wisdom of flesh, the seventh is the wrathful wisdom
Click to expand...
I like it. Just goes to show you can't judge a book by its cover. I've avoided the thread as the title turned me off, but curiousity finally got the best of me and I like it...and agree in many ways...

quie the contemplation.

The only one I have issues with currently is desire. I see the world as our oyster, provided for us...no while correct use and care is imperative...all that we desire (that isn't others or wrathful) is ours to enjoy...
 
Hi OneOff —

Like the others, I'm not entirely sure of the point you're trying to make here, nor the immediate connection with Buddhism?

I won't go into Christian aspects here ...

OneOff said:
Honestly, In Western and Christian religions there aint a good record of exploring "hard to understand things".
Click to expand...
I tend to disagree, although I will accept that Christianity doesn't tackle the 'hard to understand things' as a priority. The 'simple to understand things' seem hard enough to actualise, let alone the hard things.

Remember also that then, unlike now, the hard to understand was accessible only by ascetic self-discipline, rather than the somewhat superficial accumulation of 'facts' and 'data'.

OneOff said:
If aint consecrated via the Abrahamic faith on right down to christianity .Very little time spent on it.
Click to expand...
That's because Christianity is a complete metaphysic in itself. There's not enough time in the world to unlock all that's contained therein, let alone go looking elsewhere as well.

OneOff said:
Unlocking the meaning and understanding of a Gnostic text I do not think was a large priority way back when. (No offense).
Click to expand...
No it wasn't ... but then why should it? Gnostic texts were largely the result of individual speculation, and they were soundly criticised not only by Christianity, but by Greek Philosophical systems generally. 2nd century gnosticism was the pop-culture pick-n-mix of its day.

The Gospel of Mary is an example of this ... the influence is primarily, I think, a Greco syncretism?

Thomas
 
Thomas said:
Hi OneOff —

Like the others, I'm not entirely sure of the point you're trying to make here,

The Gospel of Mary is an example of this ... the influence is primarily, I think, a Greco syncretism?

Thomas
Click to expand...

:p Oh, Scamp that I am. This is not about the Tibetan Book of the Dead but the text I provided (if not highlighted). Going back to the understanding of the key seven. Seriously, "THANK YOU" Mr. Thomas for that helpful point. Glad you noticed. You said "I'm not entirely sure of the point you're trying to make here'". Glad you said that. Please dont get lost in my later remarks. Were not talking about Gnosticism in general or historical terms (in this). If I were to mention the term "Yama" in the christian forum I do not think the lay people would even know the reference. That doesnt mean they couldnt comment on a Gnostic work,. I think somebody said, "To me it reads a bit like the Tibetan book of the Dead". This is not new a comparison. I am not sure how but there have been many who made a similar comparison. So many, in fact, You noticed that I should have limited the discussion to the title. If I had really focused on that alone some of this inventory of minor confusions would not have happened at all.
Things seem to be the soul's journey according to the Gnostic Mary text. I appreciate Thomas that you pointed out THE ALL IMPORTANT syncretism ....... Seriously, The fact is, again, how are these "demons" (most widely held interpretation) ???
.
 
Last edited:
.. [yama] ..

That is another issue in which we can develop that if you like. However, I am far from being tedious (or monotonous),. May not be necessary yet not be a waste either,. There is the role of the Karmic 'Judgment',. The soul cometh to a setting-face-to-face with the symptoms of death as they occur during the moments of death. Then far beyond that point ... Get more curious about these encounters entailed in each of these disputed projections. Beyond that point . . . :eek:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top