Thrice-Greatest Hermes, Vol. I — G. R. S. Mead (1906)
The text is shown on its own: no facing layer is held for this issue.
In any case we have, I think, got a hint of the part played by the Daimon in our treatise. Whether or not Hermes " copied " the idea from Plato, or both derived it from the same tradition, must be left to the fancy and taste of individual scholars. The Daimon is the watcher over the " way of life " (^#09) ; he is not necessarily a Kakodaimon, but so to speak the Karmic Agent of the soul, appointed to carry out the " choice " of that soul, both good and ill, according to the Law of Necessity.1 The choice is man's; Nature adjusts the balance.
The Vision is of a typical nature, and the types are mythologized in the persons of well-known characters in Grecian story. The " way of life " the souls choose becomes the garment of " habit " they are to wear, their form of personality, or karmic limitation. Apparently some souls, instead of choosing a reincarnation in a human body, prefer to live the " lives " of certain animal natures. Are we then to believe that Plato seriously endorsed the popular ideas of metempsychosis ? Or is it possible that he is referring to some state of existence of souls, which was symbolized by certain animal types in the Mysteries ; as was certainly the case with the " lion " and " eagle," though the " swan " and " nightingale" and "ape" are, as far as I am aware, never mentioned in this connection? Can it be that Plato here gives play to his imagination, basing his speculations on some general idea he may have learned in Egypt ?
1 For the more intimate teaching on this point, see G. #., x. (xi.) 16 ff.
We know from the so-called " Diagram of the Ophites," which is still traceable in a fragmentary form in the polemic of Origen against Celsus, that the "seven spheres " of the lower psychic nature were characterised by the names of animals : lion, bull, serpent, eagle, bear, dog, ass. We also know how the whole subject of animal correspondences preoccupied the attention of the Egyptian priesthood. But not only can we now make no reasonable scheme out of the fragmentary indications that have come down to us, but we also feel pretty well certain that if Plutarch's account of the beliefs of the later Egyptians on the subject is approximately reliable, the priests themselves of those days had no longer any consistent scheme.
We may, therefore, conclude either that the whole matter was a vain superstition entirely devoid of any basis in reality ; or that there was a psychic science of animal natures and their relationship to man which was once the possession of the priesthood of the ancient civilisation of Egypt, but that it was lost, owing to the departure from amongst men of those who had the power to understand it, and subsequently only fragments of misunderstood tradition remained among the lesser folk on earth. This at anyrate is the theory of our Trismegistic treatises.
VOL. i. 29
XV
CONCERNING THE CRATER OR CUP
" HE filled a mighty Cup with it [Mind], and sent it down, joining a Herald [to it], to whom He gave command to make this proclamation to the hearts of men : Baptize thyself with this Cup's baptism," etc. — C. H., iv. (v.) 4.
THE CRATER IN PLATO
Whence came this idea of a Crater or Cup into our Trismegistic literature ? Most scholars will answer unhesitatingly : From Plato. The Crater was the Cup in which the Creator mixed the Elements of the World- Soul ; for we read in Tiinceus (41 D), where Plato is treating of the formation of human souls :
" Thus spake He, and once again into the Cup which He had used in blending and mingling the Soul of the Universe, He poured the remains of the Elements He had employed, and mingled them in much the same manner ; they were not, however, pure as before, but in the second and third degree."