Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 26:47 — 36.8MB)
For regular Gnostics Insights, subscribe here. Apple Podcasts | Amazon Music | TuneIn | Deezer | RSS
This episode transcript is also posted to A New Gnostic Gospel 7/3/2022
copyright held by Cyd Ropp; all rights reserved
The Father
As you know, we’ve been looking at the gnostic Gospel according to the Tripartite Tractate, which is one of the books in the Nag Hammadi scrolls. The Tripartite Tractate is a book that focuses on the origins of our universe and everything in it, including us. So I thought we would look around again today and revisit the Tripartite Tractate and what it has to say about the Father as the first principle of gnosticism.
Philosophers often speak of the hard problem of consciousness. Materialist scientists don’t believe in consciousness. They believe in a thing called monism, which is that we are only our physical bodies and that any appearance of consciousness or of a soul is merely a by-product of physical mechanisms, hormones, atoms moving around–this sort of thing. The counterpoint to that view, often called dualism, is that, yes, we have a physical body and then we also have a soul and it’s your soul that survives after death. This gnosticism that comes from the Nag Hammadi is a religious system that presupposes that there is a soul and there is a body.
It seems to me that the soul that people speak of surviving is the consciousness that began with the Father and derives from the Father. And that is why, whenever I discuss the system of consciousness, whether it’s in the Simple Explanation of Absolutely Everything or The Gnostic Gospel Illuminated, it always begins with the Father, because the Father is where consciousness resides. The Father is consciousness itself. The Father is another word for consciousness. Then this entire creation cosmology that’s presented through the Tripartite Tractate and then re-presented again in my book, The Gnostic Gospel Illuminated, is the path by which consciousness proceeds out from the Father through the Son, through the Totalities and the Pleroma of the Hierarchy, and on into the Second Order of Powers that populates the earth.
This is why we begin with the Father. The Father is the ground state of consciousness, and so this is why we begin to build out from the Father the flow of consciousness. My Simple Explanation of Absolutely Everything book and blog are devoted to the notion of panpsychism, which suggests that consciousness resides in everything. In gnostic terms we say that the Father extends his consciousness throughout all living things that populate the cosmos.
I like to begin with the cosmos as it unfolded and rolled out. The word for that sort of study is “cosmogony,” which is defined as the study of the origins of the universe. This makes the most sense to me–to start at the very beginning and then to go through the entire process of how everything came to be and who the principal players are and then, after that is established, to see how that applies to our lives. Then we can ask, “Why are we here? Is there a purpose to our lives? How should we live?” After that, we can finally consider the termination of the universe and what happens after we die. All of these questions are answered very precisely in the Tripartite Tractate of the Nag Hammadi. This knowledge is known as “gnosis.”
Today we begin at the very beginning, and that has to do with what is called the Father. This story, this cosmogony, begins before the beginning of time, because there was no time before our material cosmos existed.
I’m going to compare a couple of different versions of the Tripartite so that we have a fuller picture of the Father. One of the books I’m going to use is The Nag Hammadi Scriptures edited by Marvin Meyer; the translator in this case was a person named Einar Thomassen. The other version we are going to compare it to is the one posted at the Gnostic Society library at gnosis dot org and reprinted in The Nag Hammadi Library, translated by Harold Attridge.
The introduction says, “As for what we can say about the things which are exalted, what is fitting is that we begin with the Father, who is the root of the totality, the one from whom we have received grace to speak about him.” Another version says, “In order to be able to speak about exalted things, it is necessary that we begin with the Father, who is the root of the all and from whom we have obtained grace to speak about him, for he existed before anything else had come into being, except him alone.”
I invite you now to think of the originating consciousness as a vast consciousness which has no place and no time, no history. It is nothing but pure consciousness without thought, similar to what the Buddhists called the Buddha Mind. This clear state of pure consciousness is something people try to achieve during meditation, where you can be aware that you are conscious, but you have no particular thoughts or words or images going through your mind. This is the originating Father. The Father has no thought, no images, no structure or form, no thing at all. This pure consciousness is the Father.
There is no gender associated with this Father. Obviously the Father is not a man with a beard and long robes. The Tripartite Tractate says, “Rather, he possesses this constitution without having a face or form, things which are understood through perception, whence also comes the title, ‘The Incomprehensible.’ If he is incomprehensible, then it follows that he is unknowable, that he is the one who is inconceivable by any thought, invisible by anything, ineffable by any word, untouchable by any hand. He alone is the one who knows himself as he is, along with his form and his greatness and his magnitude.”
This passage affirms that no matter how much we try or science tries, the underlying consciousness underneath our existence will never be grasped, will never be measured. It can’t be discovered.
Which begs the question—if the Father is unknowable, then what are we doing here describing him? If the Father is incomprehensible, then why are we even discussing him?
What we are doing here at Gnostic Insights, and what I believe the writer of the Tripartite Tractate was doing, is that we are describing the Father as what is called a first principle. In philosophy, a first principle is a first cause, an origin, from which all else proceeds and all subsequent arguments are based. First principles are not provable; they are a priori assumptions upon which all else proceeds. This is why here at Gnostic Insights we spend so much time discussing the Father. The Father is the a priori, the first cause, the uber first principle of all else that follows—not only in a religious sense, but in a cosmogenic sense, as it is the basis upon which everything in our universe may be logically deduced.
Now back to the idea of gender. The reason this consciousness is called “Father” and not “Mother” has to do with the direction of movement initiated by the Father. The Father is a consciousness that extends outward from itself. It emanates; it doesn’t receive. The Father extends consciousness. Extension is sometimes translated as will, but it refers to the Father reaching out for what he is driving toward. The Father extends consciousness out from itself as the originating source. In this sense we can contrast that extension with the concept of “female,” which is receptive; which is that which takes into itself. The Father gives; the mother receives.
This Father’s basic consciousness is not thoughts but rather love–the sensation of what we call love. So this consciousness simply is, without time, without any prior existence, unchangeable, unmovable, without beginning or end; utterly quiet, utterly still, utterly alone.
The Father is often described as all-knowing but what is there to know? All-seeing but what is there to see? All loving but what is there to love? Omnipotent wisdom and will, but to what end? There is nothing there.
Quoting the Tripartite Tractate, “It is said of him that he is a father in the proper sense, since he is inimitable and immutable. Because of this, he is single in the proper sense and is a god because no one is a god for him. Nor is anyone a father to him, for he is unbegotten and there is no other who begot him, nor another who created him. It is, then, only the Father and God in the proper sense that no one else begot. As for the Totalities, he is the one who begot them and created them. He is without beginning and without end.”
So what this is saying is that other gods with a small g have been created or been born, but not this one. This is the original God with the big G that no one created. This is the original source.
Quote: “Not only is he without end, he is immortal for this reason that he is unbegotten, but he is also invariable in his eternal existence, in his identity, in that by which he is established and in that by which he is great. Neither will he remove himself from that by which he is, nor will anyone else force him to produce an end which he has not ever desired. He has not had anyone who initiated his own existence. Thus he is himself unchanged, and no one else can remove him from his existence and his identity, that in which he is and his greatness, so that he cannot be grasped. Nor is it possible for anyone else to change him into a different form or to reduce him or alter him or diminish him.”
The other translation is very much like that. “He is without beginning and without end, for not only is he without end, being unborn makes him immortal as well, but he is also unchangeable in his eternal being, in that which he is in, that which makes him immutable and that which makes him great.” Of course, immutable means can’t be mutated, can’t be changed. He does not move himself away from what he is, nor can anyone else force him against his will to cease being what he is, for no one has made him what he is now.”
As an aside, I am reminded of the Hadron Particle Collider located in Cern, Switzerland—the largest and most complex machine on earth. The function of point of Hadron Particle Collider is to crash elemental particles into each other, trying to split them into smaller and smaller pieces, attempting to break particles into the smallest possible particles. And in fact, what the Hadron collider has been trying to do for the last number of years is to fire particles at each other with such great force and speed that they break into the essential particle of the universe that they’re calling the Higgs boson, or the God particle. They are literally looking for the “God particle.” And, indeed, exactly ten years ago, on July 4, 2012, scientists declared they had found it.
This Tripartite description of the Father, the God Above All Gods, is saying: you cannot break God up into smaller pieces. He is immutable. He is indiscoverable in that sense. So we would have to make a prediction that these particle accelerators and colliders will not be able to find the God particle, because God is not discoverable. They may have found the Higgs boson, but God itself is undiscoverable. It cannot be broken into smaller pieces, and it seems to me that that is what this next paragraph is talking about.
“Therefore, neither does he change himself, nor will another, (such as a scientist), be able to move him from that in which he is, from what he is, from his way of being, or from his greatness. Thus, he cannot be moved, nor is it possible for another to change him into a different form, either by reducing him or changing him or making him less, for this is truly and veritably how he is unchangeable and immutable, being clothed in immutability. Thus he is called without beginning and without end, not only because he is unborn and immortal, but also because, just as he is without beginning, he is also without end. In this manner of being, he is incomprehensible in his greatness, inscrutable in his wisdom, invincible in his might, and unfathomable in his sweetness.”
We can conclude from this description that if humanity managed to destroy the earth by way of a worldwide nuclear war, the Father would still be unchanged. The Father would still exist underneath it all, without having been affected. So while it may be the case that we can destroy ourselves, we certainly cannot destroy the Father.
Carrying on, “In the true sense, he alone, the good, unborn and perfect father who lacks nothing, is complete, filled with everything he possesses–excellent and precious qualities of every kind. Moreover, he has no envy, which means that all he owns he gives away without being affected and suffering no loss by his gifts, for he is rich from the things he gives away and finds rest in what he graciously bestows.”
The other translation says that the Father is “unfathomable in his sweetness in the proper sense. He alone, the good, the unbegotten father and the complete, perfect one, is the one filled with all his offspring and with every virtue and with everything of value, and he has more, that is, lack of any malice…”
The book goes on, “He is of such a kind and form and great magnitude that no one else has been with him from the beginning. Nor is there a place in which he is or from which he has come forth or into which he will go. Nor is there a primordial form which he uses as a model as he works. Nor is there any difficulty which accompanies him and what he does. Nor is there any material which is at his disposal from which he creates what he creates, nor any substance within him from which he begets what he begets. Nor a co-worker with him working with him on the things at which he works. To say anything of this sort is ignorant. Rather, one should speak of him as good, faultless, perfect, complete, being himself the Totality.”
So if we’re going to think about our modern physics again and cosmology, and if we think if there may be multiverses, that is, we are just one universe in a sea of other universes floating in this great pool, this Father that we are describing would be back before all of that. He’s not the Father of our universe alone; he’s the Father of the entire sea within which other things float. Everything comes out of him, but he himself pre-exists all of that.
“There is no name that suits him among those that may be conceived, spoken, seen or grasped, however brilliant, exalted or glorious. It is, to be sure, possible to speak such names in order to glorify and praise him to the extent of the capacity of whoever wants to give glory, but the way he is in himself, his own manner of being, that no mind can conceive, no word express, nobody see and nobody touch, so incomprehensible is his greatness so unfathomable, his depth so immeasurable, his exaltedness is so boundless.”
Here at Gnostic Insights we would say that although the Father cannot possibly be grasped, we all possess a sense of him, for we all contain the seed of his consciousness. The Father wished to be known; to know and to be known. To love, and to be loved. Therefore the Father has provided us a cookie trail to follow in our quest for gnosis.
It said that we use these words of praise or glory to the extent that we, the ones who speak, are capable, but they fall far short of actually describing what is the Father. The Tripartite Tractate then goes on to say, “and since he has the ability to conceive of himself, to see himself, to name himself, to comprehend himself, he alone is the one who is his own mind, his own eye, his own mouth, his own form, and he is what he thinks, what he sees, what he speaks, what he grasps himself, the one who is inconceivable, ineffable, incomprehensible, immutable while sustaining joyous, true, delightful and restful, is that which he conceives, that which he sees, that about which he speaks, that which he has as thought. He transcends all wisdom and is above all intellect and is above all glory, and is above all beauty and all sweetness and all greatness and any depth and any height.”
This is my description of the Father prior to conceiving of the Son. These are descriptions of the Father as the first principle, also known as the God Above All Gods. You can see for yourself that these descriptions of the Father are not the same as the description of God in the Bible. The God of the Old Testament is personified. God in the Bible is someone who can sit and have a discussion with men around a camp fire or speak out of the middle of a burning bush.
Our gnostic God exists prior to all of that and is far greater than all of that. This God is not in a personified form, walking around on earth or floating just above earth, looking down at us. This Father is the gigantic, illimitable consciousness that underlies everything. This is an entirely different type of being than the God of the Old Testament, Jehovah. That personified character arises much later in the creation story than the Father we are describing.
But this is the beginning. Everything began with this Father Above All Fathers. This God Above all Gods is only goodness, joy, sweetness, true, and delightful. It is not a warlike or a jealous god. It would not send people into battle or kill the first-born of the entire Egyptian nation. This God, as you can see, is qualitatively different than that. This God is love.
