Talk:Ogdoad (Gnosticism)

In Gnosticism

The Gnostic Ogdoad is attributed as follows: The Abyss (Bythos) (masculine) gave rise to Silence (Grace/Thought) (feminine). They combined to give rise to Mind (masc.) and Truth (fem.). These are the Roots which bring forth the AEONS. Mind and Truth combined to create Word (masc.) and Life (fem.). Word and Life combined to bring forth Man (masc.) and "Church" (fem.). I prefer "The World" in place of "Church", or the passive substrate upon and within which Mankind operates.

I draw the symbol of the ogdoad

\|/

- -

/|\

Bottom to Top: Abyss to Silence, Nun to Naunet (Nun and Naunet are attributed as the Primordial Waters) Left to Right: Mind to Truth, Kek to Keket (Darkness) Upper Right to Lower Left: Word to Life, Amon to Amaunet (Invisible Power) Upper Left to Lower Right: Man to World, Heh to Hehet (Infinity)

I find this to be a powerful invocation of Chaos forces, and color it according to my wishes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.140.122.3 (talk • contribs) 19:38, March 10, 2005 (UTC)

Is this an actual (common) belief or practice in Gnosticism? If so, perhaps it should be added to the article under a section called "The Ogdoad in Gnosticism," or something like that?

'Kash 01:59, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

As I have written this section now with a cited reference, the answer to that is yes. However, I am listening to Stephan Hoeller (Gnostic bishop) and he mentions Christ and Sophia also as Aeons (web lecture "The Sorrow of Sophia"). Would they be lower in rank than the Ogdoad? By the way, the Greek names I have added may need expert verification. __meco (talk) 17:56, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Cosmogeny or cosmogony

Did the person who wrote "cosmogeny" really mean "cosmogony"? I have changed the spelling, under the belief that he/she did. Grantsky (talk) 15:49, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

genderless

I understand that for the genderless deities there is no need for two articles for the male and female aspects.... but is there any rhyme or reason to why the articles ended up at the male titles with female redirecting there? – cacahuate ^talk 03:21, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Egyptian and Gnostic

I've long thought that the Gnostic and Egyptian Ogdoads should have separate articles. Regardless of what the anonymous editor who posted at the top of this page may think, an ogdoad that pairs Depth with Silence, Mind with Truth, Word with Life, and Man with Church doesn't look much like an ogdoad that includes male and female versions of Formlessness, Darkness, Infinity, and Hiddenness. It is possible that the Egyptian concept influenced the Gnostic—I have seen reliable sources argue that some of the mystical imagery in certain Gnostic sects was drawn from Egyptian religion—but I've never seen an RS connect the two Ogdoads. Even if there is a connection, the two subjects aren't nearly similar enough to be covered in the same article. The Gnostics and their Ogdoad, mostly rooted in Christian mysticism and Greek philosophy, arose 2500 years after the first signs of the Egyptian Ogdoad (in the Pyramid Texts). They don't have much in common.

So how should these articles be divided? I don't know whether one topic is primary; they're both fairly obscure. I lean toward making the Ogdoad page a disambiguation, with links to "Ogdoad (Egyptian)" and "Ogdoad (Gnostic)". Does anyone agree or disagree? A. Parrot (talk) 19:49, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Personally, I myself get the impression that the Gnosticism section may well go fairly far off-topic in some of its content, and could use some serious trimming. Having said that, Google books here indicates that Madame Blavatsky at least discussed the term as well, and I don't see that mentioned in this article yet. That being the case, I think, maybe, it might be best to try to find as many as possible encyclopedic references to this subject, some of which can be found here, and see what all is mentioned in them regarding "Ogdoad". It is kind of hard for me to believe that the various usages did not have some sort of connection with each other, so there could reasonably be some basis for including all "ogdoad"s in the same article, particularly if there is perhaps a rather small amount of encyclopedic content which can be generated on some of them. For all I know, there might be other instances of the terms use as well. Maybe, and this is just a maybe, we might wait until some of us, including me, have access to some of the online databank subscriptions currently being offered, basically, the beginning of next month, and those individuals can see what content regarding this term the reference books there and elsewhere have on the topics associated with this word. John Carter (talk) 22:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

This article has been neglected for quite a few years, and I hope these additions at least provide ample source material for any interested persons to develop. I am in favor of anything that will make it more informative and comprehensive. As for Blavatsky, what she writes is little more than what is already in the article. Keep in mind that if the articles are split, it would be ideal to also go through and change all of the links on any pages that link to this one. Kramden (talk) 04:02, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Links are easy (although tedious) to change. I sort of understand John Carter's point that the different ogdoads might coexist on this page if they can't be covered in great depth. (There is at least one more ogdoad—the first link John Carter provided includes a book, Gnosis and Hermeticism from Antiquity to Modern Times, which includes a study of a Hermetic Ogdoad and Ennead, inspired by the Egyptian Ogdoad and Ennead but taking their characteristics from Hellenistic astrology.) All I can say for certain, based on my piles of sources on Egyptian religion, is that the Egyptian Ogdoad can be covered in much greater detail than it is now. I just don't have the time to work on it at the moment.

I still think the Egyptian Ogdoad should be separated sooner or later, and whatever connections it has with the others can be mentioned in that article. But if John Carter really wants to wait until autumn, we can. A. Parrot (talk) 21:20, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Incidentally, I contacted User:Meco, who added the first Gnostic material to this page in 2009, about the possible split (see User talk:Meco#Ogdoad). He replied that "separate articles seems like a good idea." A. Parrot (talk) 21:35, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Ogdoad (Gnosticism)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This sentence is unclear: The original version of the myth has the entity arising from the waters after the interaction as a mound of dirt, the Milky Way, which was deified as Hathor.

Last edited at 12:11, 18 October 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 01:44, 30 April 2016 (UTC)