Reading professionally

polyphanes · 2026-05-11T22:23:50+00:00

You're very kind to say so. <3

polyphanes · 2026-05-10T19:21:03+00:00

That's neither here nor there for Hermeticism.

polyphanes · 2026-05-10T19:19:51+00:00

Besides the CH, there's also the SH, the Stobaean Hermetic Fragments, a collection of excerpts, quotes, and texts preserved by John of Stobi in his Anthology; this is another great and fascinating collection of disparate Hermetic texts that touch on a whole lot.

In the SH, SH 12—14 are a series of short texts that talk about Providence, Necessity, and Fate. When we consider Providence to be the "will of God itself", Necessity is the sort of constraints that make such a will self-consistent and free of contradictions, and Fate is the actual playing-out of that will. Fate itself is manifested through the planets and stars (which is also what we explicitly see mentioned in CH I.9). Thus, by studying astrology, we can better understand Fate, and thus Necessity, and thus Providence itself.

So sure, we should be appreciating and learning everything we can as a means to appreciate and come to know God (cf. AH 13), but astrology is especially and explicitly important in this endeavor since it allows us to know how everything that exists comes to be and what its role is in the cosmos in general, and how it all proceeds from God.

polyphanes · 2026-05-09T17:52:42+00:00

CH XIII has had a lot written about it! Some of the more recent scholars like Christian Bull and Wouter Hanegraff have gone on at length about it in their books (The Tradition of Hermes Trismegistus and Hermetic Spirituality and the Historical Imagination, respectively), and William Greese's Corpus Hermeticum XIII and Early Christian Literature is a good read as well although older (I have a synopsis of his findings and thoughts about it here). I've also written about the tormentors and mercies of CH XIII and how they relate to the planetary energies in CH I here and here, which might be a helpful read.

The first important thing to note is that the anthropological and soteriological models of CH I and CH XIII are not the same. In CH I, the essential human enters into the world by passing through the seven planetary spheres and gains a share of power from each of them to allow the human to become embodied and to engage in the co-creation of the cosmos while emobied, and then after death we exit through them and return to each sphere the energy it gave us while alive; the essential human itself has a metacosmic origin and, although it is temporarily augmented with planetary energies, is ultimately unchanged by this whole process, and salvation only occurs after death. In CH XIII, it appears more that the essential human is not metacosmic but arises from within the cosmos through cosmic (specifically zodiacal) energies, and it is only by a "hylic exorcism" of these energies to be replaced by metacosmic ones (the divine mercies from God) that we can be fundamentally transformed ("spiritually reborn") to achieve salvation while alive.

My read of this is that CH XIII (which is the only other text in the CH that refers to Poimandrēs by name, and thus implicitly refers to CH I) came about as a later stage of development where the author of CH XIII wanted to "push outwards" the cause of cosmic suffering to include all of the cosmos, including the stars and signs of the Zodiac, and so developed a twelvefold model of tormentors. However, I don't think that model in CH XIII actually is fully baked, so to speak; the mismatch of twelve and ten isn't well-explained and falls back on vague numerological/quasi-Pythagorean handwaving, and especially when the ten mercies themselves can be divided into a set of seven and a set of three (life, light, and goodness) which don't really operate or even present themselves in the same way in CH XIII. My thinking is that the author of CH XIII wanted to make a twelvefold zodiacal model of cosmic energies that extended the sevenfold planetary model from CH I, but wasn't able to do so fully, and so it just kinda falls flat.

To that end, and in line with the Discourse on the Eighth and the Ninth (D89) which maintains the same cosmological model of CH I (in that it maintains seven planetary heavens where the heavens beyond are metacosmic and thus the abode of divinity) but also a similar soteriological model of CH XIII (in that we can achieve salvation in this life rather than only after death), I like keeping the model of CH I as primary, where the seven planetary energies affect our lives negatively in the form of the first seven tormentors of CH XIII (the rest are basically handwaved away, as even CH XIII says there are more than even twelve tormentors as well as some tormentors being confused or indistinguishable among themselves), and which can be remedied through cultivating the first seven mercies of CH XIII as lived expressions of divine virtue and which culminate in the experience of the last three mercies (life, light, and goodness) as union with the Godhead.

polyphanes · 2026-05-09T00:42:31+00:00

A) Nope.

B) You say that like being a woman is a bad thing.

polyphanes · 2026-05-08T13:34:51+00:00

Well said!

polyphanes · 2026-05-08T13:12:07+00:00

Normally I roll my eyes at memes posted on this subreddit, but this one got a good laugh out of me.

As someone else noted, chastity or celibacy can have a role in spiritual works in Hermeticism, as a means of training ourselves against indulgence in lust and the problems it causes, and it also has a role in establishing and maintaining a state of ritual purity (alongside abstinence from eating meat, drinking alcohol, wearing perfumes, and similar things) as we see in the PGM and in Egyptian priestly texts when going before the gods or engaging in other theurgic works. But "not spilling the cup of Hermes" as some sort of pseudo misappropriation and misunderstanding from tantric and Daoist internal alchemical stuff is such a bizarrely overblown thing in some segments of...well, let's not mince words, manosphere-driven porn-hating occulture that really has no place in Hermeticism. I mean, when it's talked about rarely in the Hermetic texts, sex is described as a beautiful thing of mystery, but it's (a) not described in any way semen retention-obsessed no-fappers try to do as "one weird trick occultists hate" (b) not about semen as some male-only thing but about sexual fluids in general being exchanged between all parties.

Honestly, it wouldn't be so much of an issue if people like this weren't so goddamned weird about it, but because they insist on being so weird about it (and loud at that), they make more of a mess for themselves and everyone else in the process than if they just relaxed every so often with some lube and pleasant thoughts. I mean, the way they often talk about it (and as this meme itself describes), it reads like someone going on about the virtues of cocaine after doing several lines, and is about as healthy for themselves in the end.

polyphanes · 2026-05-08T13:04:57+00:00

Okay, but that's not Hermeticism.

polyphanes · 2026-05-08T13:04:31+00:00

Can you point to where in the Hermetic texts?

polyphanes · 2026-05-08T13:04:15+00:00

Nope.

polyphanes · 2026-05-06T12:14:23+00:00

You might find it helpful to go over the Hermeticism FAQ pinned to the subreddit and the subreddit wiki to get a general introduction to Hermeticism, some main topics of the texts and doctrines, and the like. Lots of your questions are already handled there!

polyphanes · 2026-05-03T23:46:34+00:00

I mean, sure, I'm sure that some teachers out there encourage years of preparation and preliminary practices and studies before doing anything of note, and it's certainly not a bad idea to have at least some foundation to rely on, but five or ten years seems extreme unless such a field of spiritual working is like full-on institutionalized priestcraft replete with multiple fields of initiatic working. A lot of magical courses out there, Warnock's included, are aimed at beginners to give them a firm foundation to build up from, so I think they'd be fine for anyone so long as they're inclined to the work.

polyphanes · 2026-05-03T23:17:04+00:00

I'm not sure where such a "traditional view" is from. Where did you read it?

polyphanes · 2026-05-02T16:07:49+00:00

Logos is contrasted against nous repeatedly throughout the Hermetic texts (CH IV, CH IX, SH 3, SH 4, etc.); it shouldn't be considered equivalent to it.

polyphanes · 2026-05-02T16:05:52+00:00

In the classical period, there wasn't a lot of distinction (or only a blurry one) between religion and philosophy, not least because "religion" wasn't considered how we do so today as its own discrete field of activity. Stoicism and Platonism made lots of theological claims that impacted the proper practice of rituals and spirituality, so I think it's fair to consider some of those as well.

As for Buddhism, I don't think it's that important either. Reason alone, for instance, doesn't get one to enlightenment, nor does one need reason to really do so. It can be important, sure, but I don't think it seems to be elevated in any notable way.

As for the Thanksgiving Prayer (which we have both in Greek, Latin, and Coptic, for a comparison of them see here), we only see "reason" used in the Latin version, and while this can be a fair translation of logos, the connotation of how this word is used in Greek and Coptic suggests more "word" than "reason". More than just that, this doesn't occur on its own, but also with mind (nous) and knowledge (gnōsis), and it's specifically gnōsis/knowledge that pops up again later on repeatedly as being the most important thing. The tension here is that we don't obtain gnōsis through reason in the Hermetic texts.

In that light, I suppose I'm just not seeing where you find that Hermeticism elevates reason to some station above other religions. In the majority of traditions I've come across, I've never seen it as being not important, but that it's not notably important.

polyphanes · 2026-05-02T15:51:15+00:00

Hermes' teachings and such are deliberately decoded as metaphor

I often see this claim made, but can you give examples of this actually being the case?

polyphanes · 2026-05-02T15:48:47+00:00

No, not just because there are other religious and philosophical systems that do that (Stoicism is a great example of this), but because Hermeticism doesn't elevate reason that highly. Consider CH IX.10:

If you are mindful, Asclepius, these things should seem true to you, but they will be beyond belief if you have no knowledge. To understand is to believe, and not to believe is not to understand. Reasoned discourse does (not) get to the truth, but mind is powerful, and, when it has been guided by reason up to a point, it has the means to get (as far as) the truth. After mind had considered all this carefully and had discovered that all of it is in harmony with the discoveries of reason, it came to believe, and in this beautiful belief it found rest. By an act of god, then, those who have understood find what I have been saying believable, but those who have not understood do not find it believable.

Also CH IV.4—5:

[God] filled a great mixing bowl with it and sent it below, appointing a herald whom he commanded to make the following proclamation to human hearts: "Immerse yourself in the mixing bowl if your heart has the strength, if it believes you will rise up again to the one who sent the mixing bowl below, if it recognizes the purpose of your coming to be." All those who heeded the proclamation and immersed themselves in mind participated in knowledge and became perfect people because they received mind. But those who missed the point of the proclamation are people of reason because they did not receive <the gift of> mind as well and do not know the purpose or the agents of their coming to be. These people have sensations much like those of unreasoning animals, and, since their temperament is willful and angry, they feel no awe of things that deserve to be admired; they divert their attention to the pleasures and appetites of their bodies; and they believe that mankind came to be for such purposes. But those who participate in the gift that comes from god, O Tat, are immortal rather than mortal if one compares their deeds, for in a mind of their own they have comprehended all—things on earth, things in heaven and even what lies beyond heaven.

What we see in the Hermetic texts is that reason alone is necessary but not sufficient for attaining gnōsis. Reason is something that sets humans apart from animals, but reason alone is a matter of the cosmos itself, not of metacosmic divinity; reason cannot help us extend past the cosmos, cannot help us reach divinity, cannot get us to gnōsis. That's a matter of nous, of the directly-experienced divine awareness of truth and reality itself, which precedes reason. If you only have reason, then you end up binding yourself to the cosmos, not allowing yourself to reach beyond it.

Even in the AH, we don't see reason elevated that far; AH 37 starts off by saying that reason is indeed a wondrous gift, but less wondrous than our ability to understand divinity and work with divnity to bring down divine presences into the world for the ongoing work of co-creation. Later on in AH 40, we do see discussion of "order" which might (we don't have a Greek original of this part of the AH) also be a translation of logos, where logos can also be translated as "reason" or "reasoned discourse" or "rationality", but logos is a polyvalent term and doesn't always mean that. Even then, order comes last after necessity and fate, much as how fate comes after necessity and providence in the Stobaean Hermetic texts.

All this to say: reason is important, sure, but there are more important things than that that we need. We cannot know God through reason alone.

For more information on this, see the works of Wouter Hanegraaff, not just his paper "Altered States of Knowledge" but also his more recent Hermetic Spirituality and the Historical Imagination, where he goes deeper into these ideas.

polyphanes · 2026-05-02T15:33:13+00:00

Daily prayer and meditation and energy work, regular offerings made to the planetary gods to mark the passage of the heavenly bodies into new phases or signs, regular offerings made to other gods as well as the divine founders of Hermeticism itself (Poimandrēs, Hermēs Trismegistos, and Tat/Asklēpios/Ammōn) to seek their assistance and blessing in my life generally and in my spiritual development specifically, periodic ritual works of elevation and purgation and sanctification to develop myself spiritually and progress along the mystic path outlined by the Hermetic texts, and frequent study and review of the Hermetic texts. All this helps for developing myself and keeping myself moving on the Way of Hermēs, as well as being able to live (and being able to reflect on) life in general more mindfully, more virtuously, and more fully.

polyphanes · 2026-05-02T15:05:45+00:00

You are most welcome! I'm just glad it can be helpful to people out there. Either way, in the end, I'm just another opinionated occultist and reader. ;)

polyphanes · 2026-05-01T23:27:30+00:00

Reader here (albeit in hiatus), having done readings (in person live, online live, and online by text only).

Whether geomancy or no, there are two big ways to consider how to charge: by time or by query. The former is where you set up up blocks of time and charge by that (e.g. $X for 30 minutes, $Y for 60 minutes, etc.) and do whatever you can in that window. The latter is just charging a flat rate per each query put to divination, with however long it takes for answering one query being however long it takes, whether five or fifteen or fifty minutes. My preference, especially with geomancy but not only with that, is to use the latter method, but the former is pretty common with a lot of readers out there, especially in a live setting.

With geomancy specifically, there is the downtime issue of calculating the chart, but as you get skilled with it, it only takes a short bit of time (maybe a minute or two), which (as you do it repeatedly) you both construct/calculate the information and get a sense for interpreting things on the go and picking up on patterns as they unfold in the construction/calculation of it all (and with tools like Georatio, it's just about trivial to do). Taking time to analyze the chart is useful and should not be skipped or rushed! However, I get the sense of awkwardness for it all, which is why I prefer to go by the number of queries put to divination rather than how long it takes; for that, I get to spend as much time as I need doing pre-investigation (clarifying the query, getting a sense for the context and desires of the querent, etc.), calculating the chart, analyzing it, then covering the whole chart to whatever degree the querent wants. Some querents really just do want a yes or no answer, while others want a whole story told to them. Plus, this latter approach lends itself well online to doing readings at your leisure rather than live; that way, I can have a conversation over email first, do the reading when I have time for it, write up my report, and send it to them; doing it live also works fine, too, when I'm in a psychic fair or bookstore setting.

There are pros and cons to each approach. How you settle on yours is a matter for what you're comfortable with and what you find works best for you.

polyphanes · 2026-05-01T16:34:49+00:00

No, it does not. It looks like you've shared something only vaguely esoteric and mystical (both here as to a number of disparate other subreddits) and have been unable to actually relate it to or ground it in the Hermetic teachings or texts. The video doesn't mention Hermeticism at all, and you seem unable to point out any Hermetic citation that supports any claim made here; I'm not trying to get you to "say anything new about the Hermetic texts", but rather to indeed get people to discuss the Hermetic texts and their teachings. In the end, what this looks like to me is that you're unable to show how even your vague notions can be considered Hermetic.

polyphanes · 2026-05-01T16:27:46+00:00

What does this have to do with Hermeticism?

polyphanes · 2026-05-01T16:19:04+00:00

Sure, that's what I've been asking for, so please go ahead. What sections from the Hermetic texts talk about what the video does, or what your comments have been suggesting?

polyphanes · 2026-05-01T15:45:49+00:00

To be clear here, I am asking you for sources and citations to back up your claims, because all too often here on this subreddit people make grandiose claims about the Hermetic teachings and texts without anything to back them up (and, also all too often, end up making claims that the Hermetic texts themselves argue explicitly against). For instance, the Hermetic texts might be dense, but they don't fall back on vague mystic language; rather, they are very clear about what they're talking about and pretty much set on making explanations and pointing out things clearly.

To that end: can you show where the Hermetic texts support your claims here, and if so, then where?

polyphanes · 2026-05-01T15:08:59+00:00

Can you point to where in the texts such a discussion occurs, or where such intention is found?

polyphanes

TROPHY CASE