A piece of business here– I have taken down the contact me form on the Gnostic Insights website because all I ever get from it is junk emails that jam up my box. So if you want to contact me, probably the best way to do it is to go to the Gnostic Reformation on Substack and then leave a comment underneath the latest podcast episode. Then I will definitely see what you are writing to me. Or you could contact me through LinkedIn, but I don’t want you to contact me if you’re trying to sell me something, some sort of service, because honestly, I get dozens of those a day and it’s just too much. It’s just really too much. And the chances of me saying, yeah, are practically nil. Okay. So that’s why there’s no longer a contact me form there at Gnostic Insights.
The children’s book is published and out on amazon.com. It’s already sold three copies. Hopefully that’s just the beginning.
And on another matter, I’m going to run another free booksy promotion for A Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel on Amazon. And you can get the ebook of A Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel for free from August 23rd through the 26th. That way, even if I had sent you a free copy for reviews or anything like that, or if you have been given a copy of the book as a gift, you can still qualify to leave a review on Amazon for the book because it will be a verified purchase, even though you didn’t have to pay anything for it. We really need to boost those reviews, folks. So please do me a favor. Write a review or at least throw some stars my direction for the book. Okay?
What we’re going to look at today is basically Chapter Five from A Simple Explanation of the Gnostic Gospel. And that chapter is called The Fall of Logos and the Rise of the Deficiency. I’m going to focus on the deficiency and what that means—why it’s called the deficiency. I’m just going to skim through Chapter Five.
We know that in this form of Gnosticism that I teach that comes directly out of the Tripartite Tractate of the Nag Hammadi, the Aeon we discuss is not Sophia, but rather Logos. And this is one of the big things that sets the Tripartite Tractate apart from the other books in the Nag Hammadi. The Tripartite Tractate talks about Logos. And I prefer this. Let me tell you why.
The story with Sophia and her Fall and then her illegitimate child, Yaldabaoth, and all of the things that happened to them down on the Earth—that’s a mythological type of story. On the other hand, the story of Logos, the Aeon Logos and its Fall, it’s not mythological in the same way. It’s logical. It has to do with the way that consciousness rolls out from the Source. It has to come from the original Source and then keep coming down to us as we sit here talking and listening. The Tripartite Tractate follows that course of consciousness from the Source, which is called the Father in the Tripartite Tractate, and then through the first emanation of the Father, which is called the Son in the Tripartite Tractate. And then how does it get from the Son to all of us down here? There is a mechanism for that. And that’s the mechanism we’re going to talk some about today.
You see, Logos was the final Aeon produced by the combination of all of the Aeons of the Fullness of God together, giving praise and glory to the Father and Son. And in their combined Fullness, all of them focused on a single topic, that being giving praise to the Father and Son, they gave birth to the final Aeon.
And that birth is that Logos, the final Aeon produced by the Fullness of God through their combination, contains within itself a complete pleroma that’s one level down, one fractal level down from the actual Fullness of God. Logos is a true image or representation of the Fullness of God, simply one fractal level down. So Logos looks just like the Fullness. His pleroma looks exactly like the Fullness. Everybody’s in there.
And Logos then mistook himself for the Fullness because he was complete, and he knew all of the plans, and he could dream of Paradise like nobody’s business, all by himself.
And so Logos decided to launch himself into the realm of glory to reunite with the Father. But, without the willing support of the Fullness, Logos wasn’t able to give proper glory to the Father, and therefore he stumbled and fell. The Tripartite Tractate puts it this way:
The Logos himself caused it to happen, being complete and unitary, for the glory of the Father, whom he desired, and (he did so) being content with it, but those whom he wished to take hold of firmly he begot in shadows [and] copies and likenesses. For, he was not able to bear the sight of the light, but he looked into the depth and he doubted. (Attridge and Mueller, verse 77)
… which is just another way to say that Logos took upon himself a great project, and then he found he couldn’t pull it off. And then he began to doubt himself, and that was looking into the darkness. By the way, we are fractals way down the road from Logos, so everything that we hear about going on in the Fullness or with Logos and the deficiency, it happens to all of us too.
As Logos reached for the Father, Logos stumbled and fell. Now, this is the original Fall. It’s not Eve handing Adam an apple in the Garden of Eden. It was not we humans who brought death and disaster into the cosmos. That is above our pay grade. It seems so obvious. The Fall happened way before. It happened with that Aeon Logos taking a fall. Quoting again,
His self-exaltation and his expectation of comprehending the incomprehensible became firm for him and was in him. But the sicknesses followed him when he went beyond himself, having come into being from self-doubt, namely from the fact that he did not <reach the attainment of> the glories of the Father, the one whose exalted status is among things unlimited. This one did not attain him, for he did not receive him. (Attridge and Mueller, verse 77)
And that was for the protection of Logos, because it says earlier in the Tripartite Tractate that anyone approaching the glory of the Father would be annihilated. That’s the word that’s used—annihilated—because the Father is so much greater than the consciousness that would be approaching it.
When Logos reached for the illimitable, when he went for the Father, he believed in himself that he was about to produce Paradise, the Paradise that Logos, along with the rest of the Fullnesses, were singing about and dreaming of together. He had all the plans, like an architectural design for Paradise, but he couldn’t pull it off and he went beyond himself. And this overreach brought the sickness of self-doubt onto his soul. Now prior to this time, every Aeon’s core Self was in perfect harmony with its ego, and their ego’s function was to put into practice the will of the Father. But now Logos’ ego departed from that. Now self-doubt replaced the ineffable joy of the Fullness. So this division of the deeply troubled Logos was the first manifestation of ego acting outside the will of the one Self and the Fullness. We could say that the Fall was an act of ego falling away from the true Self, and you see that happens to all of us.
Now the Tripartite Tractate doesn’t call the word ego. They call it presumptuous thought, because Logos had a presumptuous thought. He presumed that he could plug back into the Father, that he could create Paradise on his own. But I am seeing that presumptuous thought as the word for ego, particularly the type of ego that has come down to us. It’s presumptuous, meaning that it goes beyond what’s right and proper.
Egoic thought places the focus of one’s thought on your own desires without regard to others. It’s always about, what am I going to do now? Presumptuous thought, it’s all about me, me, me. Whereas the Aeons of the Fullness, being in complete harmony with their ego and Self, they are not me types of creatures. The Aeons all live for one another in perfect harmony.
Verse 78 of the Tripartite Tractate says,
Like the Pleromas are the things which came into being from the arrogant thought, which are their (the Pleromas’) likenesses, copies, shadows, and phantasms, lacking reason and the light, these which belong to the vain thought, since they are not products of anything. (Attridge and Mueller)
So here the ego of Logos is characterized as vain thought, and the copies produced by the Fall are not true images of the Aeons. They are imitations. They are shadows, likenesses, apparitions. They’re not products of anything. That’s a quote: not products of anything. It indicates that unlike this flow of consciousness that we’ve been talking about—from the Source, to the Son, to the Fullnesses, into Logos and the fractals or pleroma of Logos—these products of the Fall are not part of that flow of consciousness. They are outside of the will of God. These shadows were conjured up out of nothing. They’re literally shadows. It’s like when you’re standing outside and the sun is casting your shadow onto the ground. There’s you, and then there’s that dark flat shadow just lying there; it has no consciousness. It can’t do anything. All it can do is mirror in a flattened-dimensional way what you do. They don’t contain the Holy Spirit of the Father. They’re flat without depth. The Tripartite Tractate says,
Because of this, he suffered a division and a turning away. [So, we’re talking about Logos.] From the faltering and the division came oblivion and ignorance of oneself and <of that> which is. (Thomassen, verse 77)
The forgetfulness and ignorance of himself and of that which is now becomes a defining characteristic of the ego’s relationship to the Self in all of us: the ego of Logos became entirely estranged from its better Self. All that remains of Logos down here below is the shell of his broken ego and an infinite number of ego-ridden dark shadows, which I depict as these blue balls rolling out in all directions. The ego, divided from its Self, has total amnesia of Logos, the Fullness, and the Father. It recognizes nothing but its own presumptuous thought—that is, its own egoic thought.
So these shadows are a product of ego run amok, of ego no longer within those bonds of love of the Self, no longer acting out of the Simple Golden Rule of love—working together, sharing information, producing something better than itself. Instead, they’re all out for themselves because the ego of Logos overreached. And so these shadows were born out of overreaching, out of putting themselves above others. And every one of them, well, I was going to say is out for themselves, but they don’t have Selfs. These shadows do not have consciousness on their own. They are part of the broken pleroma of the ego of Logos. And that ego is what we call the Demiurge in Gnosticism. The Demiurge is the ego of the fallen Aeon. It’s only ego.
And so when you think about it, think about the news, think about people you know, think about people that are only in it for themselves. They are serving their own ego, their own aggrandizement. They’re not serving their true Self, which is a reflection of the image of the Fullness of God. They’re not serving their Self or the Fullness or the Son or the Father. They’re serving only their own ego. Therefore, the things that I’m about to read to you, the characteristics of the deficiencies, of the shadows of the deficiency, of the imitations, the copies and the phantoms—think about how these words relate to your own ego when it’s out of step with the will of God.
Therefore, their end will be like their beginning. From that which did not exist, they are to return once again to that which will not be.
That’s the shadows. So the shadows don’t exist in actuality. And once the light of God is turned on in the cosmos, they will disappear. Darkness and shadows flee the light.
“Therefore, their end will be like their beginning: from that which did not exist (they are) to return once again to that which will not be,” speaking of the shadows. “It is they, however, by themselves who are greater, more powerful, and more honored than the names which are given to them, which are [their] shadows,” speaking of the Aeons. “In the manner of a reflection are they” the shadows “beautiful. For the [face] of the copy normally takes its beauty from that of which it is a copy.” (Attridge and Mueller, verses 78–79)
So these shadows and likenesses resemble the Fullnesses, but their beauty is only skin deep. Their beauty is not consciousness and love. It’s like thinking that the images on a movie screen are real and alive and conscious. They’re not. They’re flat. And they are beautiful, like the actors that played them, but they themselves have no substance. Quoting the Tripartite Tractate again,
The Logos was a cause of those [who] came into being and he continued all the more to be at a loss and he was astonished. Instead of perfection, he saw a defect; instead of unification, he saw division; instead of stability, he [saw] disturbances; instead of [rests], tumults. Neither was it [possible] for him to make them cease from [loving] disturbance, nor was it possible for him to destroy it. He was completely powerless, once his totality and his exaltation abandoned him. (Attridge and Mueller, verse 80)
They remind me of rioters. The rioters may say they’re doing things for a just and noble cause, but when they’re acting out of hatred, and they’re hurting and killing and burning and looting, that’s not righteous. That’s not an expression of love. Quoting again,
Those who had come into being not knowing themselves both did not know the Pleromas from which they came forth and did not know the one who was the cause of their existence. (Attridge and Mueller, verse 80)
So in addition to being unable to relate to others, these small imitations of the fallen ego of Logos did not even recognize the pleroma of Logos out of which they arose, much less have any inkling of the Self that had abandoned the pleromas of the Fullness and the ALL. Quoting the Tripartite Tractate again,
The Logos, being in such unstable conditions, did not continue to bring forth anything like emanations, the things which are in the Pleroma, the glories which exist for the honor of the Father. Rather, he brought forth little weaklings, [hindered] by the illnesses by which he too was hindered. It was the likeness of the disposition which was a unity, that which was the cause of the things which do not themselves exist from the first. (Attridge and Mueller, verses 80–81)
So when the Tripartite Tractate talks about things that are a likeness, that’s when it’s talking about that flat 2-D representation that has no consciousness.
They wanted to command one another, overcoming one another [in] their vain ambition, while the glory which they possess contains a cause [of ] the system which was to be. They are likenesses of the things which are exalted. They were brought to a lust for power in each one of them, according to the greatness of the name of which each is a shadow, each one imagining that it is superior to his fellows. (Attridge and Mueller, verse 79)
Now that’s speaking on several levels. The likenesses of the imitation don’t remember Logos. They don’t know Logos. They don’t know anything, really. They live in disobedience and acts of rebellion because they don’t remember the Father or the Fullness. They don’t remember the Simple Golden Rule of cooperation and love.
All of our egos have a choice to cooperate with the Self or to deny the Self and stake a narcissistic claim to consciousness. Since this ego of Logos was unaware of its origin as the Logos of the Fullness and the Father, it believed it was its own originating consciousness. Hence, everything that it produced was similarly ignorant and disobedient to the Father and the Fullness. In this manner, the deficiency took on an imitation of life on its own, becoming the cause of the things that do not exist on their own account.
So, remember these likenesses of the deficiency have no more self-awareness than your reflection in the mirror has. They are controlled strictly by the Demiurge, and the Demiurge does have the borrowed consciousness of the Self of Logos. So even though the Demiurge is down here in the material world and Logos is up there in the ethereal plane, it is still one entity–Logos. His Self is up above, his ego is stuck down below, and it is the ego of the Demiurge that brings order and a false Paradise to this material world. That’s why it’s called the deficiency. It’s the imitation of Paradise.
So how is your ego doing? What’s its relationship to your true Self? What is the relationship of your ego to the Fullness of God? Are you always battling? Is your ego battling yourself? Is it always trying to ignore the good suggestions that the Self has? Does it usually win those arguments? The more that you let your ego control your soul, the more difficult your life will be. The ego always promises really good things. It promises that it’s going to be a lot better if you just let it have its full reign, because you can get this, and you can get that, and you can have this, and you can have that, and you can do whatever you want, because it’s your life and you deserve it.
But it doesn’t work out that way. It’s a lie. It’s only when our ego is subordinate to our true Self, and works in harmony with your true Self. Your true Self is an actual reflection of the Fullness of God. You have the entirety of the Fullness of God inside of yourself. We all do. And that is how that we know right from wrong. That’s what your conscience is.
So next time you find yourself in an argument with your better nature versus what you really want to do, stop. Remember the Fullness. Remember the Father. Remember the Christ.
Onward and upward, and God bless us all.