This essay argues that scholarship on gnostic texts could strongly benefit from taking into greater account elements of autochthonous ancient Egyptian religious concepts when interpreting gnostic intellectual and ritual systems. The central argument focuses on conspicuously similar roles and characteristics of female characters in both gnostic and ancient Egyptian symbolism, as witnessed especially within the Egyptian theological and ritual traditions of the so-called Great Goddesses (Isis, Neith, and Hathor). As these immensely popular cults were contemporaneous with the presumed development of various gnostic systems, this essay argues for a direct Egyptian – gnostic influence. The textual analysis focuses on a comparison of Chapter 30 of the Adversus haereses of Irenaeus of Lyon (with appropriate references to original gnostic concepts and texts) with an Egyptian cosmogonic myth located in the temple of Khonsu in Karnak, proceeding then to the analysis of select passages of NHC VI,2 (The Thunder: Perfect Mind). The essay argues that in both ancient Egyptian and gnostic sources, female characters are described as: (1) primordial deities, creators of elementary principles governing creation; (2) being in a mutual relationship of createdness with a divine male creative principle/the world; (3) androgynous/gynandrous, begetting through some type of autoerotic activity; (4) taking on primordial serpentine forms; (5) rulers of the created world; (6) mediators with the ability to connect opposing principles; (7) ambivalent and – from the androcentric optics of these symbolic systems – as possessing deeply troubling, creative/destructive abilities. These ancient Egyptian concepts would have been disseminated among Gnostics living in Egypt – for example, during the massively popular public festivals of the various Great Goddess cults at their ritual centres at Phylae, Dendera, Edfu, and Saïs.
Článek pojednává o koncepci geneze novověku, kterou Hans Blumenberg představil ve svém díle Legitimita novověku (1966) a kterou dál rozpracovával a doplňoval v dalších dílech. Článek je rozdělen do pěti oddílů. První velice stručně představuje obecné rysy Blumenbergovy filosofie, zejména jeho pojem ulehčení od absolutna. Druhý oddíl představuje Blumenbergovo pojetí gnoze a křesťanskou reakce na gnozi. Blumenberg je totiž přesvědčen, že novověk vznikl jako druhé překonání gnoze, které bylo úspěšnější než první překonání provedené křesťanstvím. Třetí oddíl vysvětluje Blumenbergovu myšlenku návratu gnostického skrytého Boha v pozdně středověkém nominalismu. Čtvrtý oddíl ukazuje způsoby, jimiž se podle Blumenberga ustanovil novověk jako druhé a úspěšné překonání gnoze – především za pomoci masivního rozvoje vědy a techniky. Pátý oddíl obsahuje kritické výhrady vůči Blumenbergově koncepci a rovněž ocenění aktuálnosti jeho filosofie pro dnešní diskuse o povaze raně novověké filosofie., This paper deals with the concept of the genesis of the modern age as introduced by Hans Blumenberg in his book The Legitimacy of the Modern Age (1966) which he elaborated on and complemented in his later writings. The paper is divided into five sections. The first very briefly presents the general features of Blumenberg’s philosophy, especially his notion of “relief from the absolute”. The second section introduces Blumenberg’s concept of gnosis and of the Christian responses to gnosis. Blumenberg was convinced that the modern times emerged as the second overcoming of gnosis which was more successful than its first overcoming by Christianity. The third section introduces Blumenberg’s idea of the recurrence of the hidden gnostic God in late medieval nominalism. The fourth section presents ways in which the modern age, according to Blumenberg, emerged as the successful overcoming of gnosis – especially with the help of the amazing development of science and technology in the early-modern period. The fifth section contains some critical reservations about Blumenberg’s theory. Nevertheless it also appreciates the relevance of Blumenberg’s philosophy for today’s discussion about both the nature and the history of early modern philosophy., and Špelda Daniel.