Self-Manifestation and ‘Primary Revelation’ in the Platonizing Sethian Ascent Treatises and Plotinian Mysticism
This paper will explore the interpenetration of Gnosticism and Platonism by examining in detail a particular motif in the Platonizing Sethian ascent treatises, especially Zostrianos (NHC VIII,1) and Allogenes (NHC XI,3), and then briefly comparing this motif to a parallel feature in Plotinus, who was known to have read and critiqued these particular treatises. It is well known that in the Platonizing Sethian treatises, as in Plotinus, the ascent towards the transcendent, hyperontic deity recapitulates the process of ontogenesis in reverse; in the case of Allogenes, for example, it is often noted that one ascends through some version of the derivational scheme of the so-called noetic triad (Being-- Life-- Intellect) that was systematized by later Platonists (indeed this passage, Allog. 59.1-61.22, is curiously reminiscent of Plotinus III.8[30].9). Yet I would like to suggest that there are more specific features of the Sethian ascent passages which suggest a striking parallel between the visionary ascent itself and the first moments of ontogenesis. In both Zostrianos and Allogenes the ascending aspirant must revert or “withdraw” (anachôrein) to his or her self at a crucial stage of ascent towards the supreme principle, while at the penultimate stage of ascent, the aspirant experiences a self-manifestation (or, equivalently, a manifestation of the transcendent principle within the self) that is an immediate prerequisite for a direct experience of the unknowable deity. In Allogenes this is specifically referred to as a “primary revelation” (oymntshorp noyônh ebol). The pattern of self-reversion followed by self-manifestation during the ascent is closely parallel in structure and terminology to the initial moment of ontogenesis, i.e. the moment at which the first, transcendent principle (the Unknowable One / Invisible Spirit) unfolds itself into the second (usual the multipartite Barbelo Aeon) through a similar process of self-manifestation or self-reflection. Indeed this may explain the perplexing term “primary revelation,” often (erroneously, in my opinion) taken to refer to the extended negative-theological discourse revealed by luminaries at Allog. 61.28-67.20. Rather, the “primary revelation” may be a deliberate reminiscence of the initial self-manifestation of the transcendent principle at the first moment of ontogenesis, similarly described as -oyônh ebol, at, for example, Allog. (NHC XI,3) 45.17, Zost. (NHC VIII,1) 3.12, Ap. Jn. (NHC II,4 etc.) 4.31, etc. Similarly, in Plotinus, the ascending mystic must recapitulate within his or her self the experience of the transcendent deity; the penultimate stage of the Plotinian ascent, just prior to union with the One, consists of a sudden vision of the self described in terms similar if not identical to the first moments of ontogenesis in which the One’s eternal efflux reverts to its source and perceives its (former) self, thereby introducing the first subject-object duality. The similarity of these Sethian texts with Plotinus’mystical passages-- indeed, with that aspect of his thought long considered to be the most intimate and experiential feature of his spiritual life-- is extremely striking, and suggests, if not a simple dependence of Plotinus on the Gnostics, at least a significant dialogue between them.

<< Back to Home Page