The Gnostic Crucifixion

by G. R. S. Mead

That is, presumably, the material Air, Air of the Darkness, as compared with the spiritual Air or Air of the Light. The Docetic writer, Hippolytus says, explained the use of the term as follows:

“Moses called it Batos, because, in their passing from Above, Below, all the Ideas of the Light [that is, the Light-sparks or spirits of men] used the Air as their means of passage (batos).”

In other words Batos, as Air, was the link between Light and Darkness, which Darkness was regarded as essentially a flowing or Watery chaos. The Batos was the Way Down and the Way Up of souls.

We are not, however, to suppose that the origin of this idea was the text of Exodus. By no means; the idea came first, indeed was fundamental with the Gnosis; the mystic exegesis of the “burning bush” passage was an exercise in ingenuity. For the Gnosis, the that which at once separated and united the Light and the Darkness was the Cross. The Angel of God speaking to Moses out of the Fiery Batos was for the Christian Gnostics one of the most striking apocalypses of ancient Jewish scripture; and it was primarily one of the chief functions of the Gnosis to throw light on the under-meaning. This the Docetic exegete does in his own fashion, using the reading of the Greek Targum or Translation of the Seventy, in this wise: “Batos? Batos does not mean ‘bush’ really, but ‘medium of transmission,’” It is by means of this that the Word of God comes unto us—namely, by the mystery of the uniter-separator in one, which was called by many names.

For instance, in setting forth the Sophia-mythus, or Wisdom-story, or mystery of cosmogenesis, of the Valentinian school, Hippolytus (op. cit., vi. 3), treats of the Cross as the final mystery of all. With original documents before him, he writes:

“Now it is called Boundary, because it bounds off the Deficiency from the Fullness [so as to make it] exterior to it; it is called Partaker because it partakes of the Deficiency as well; and it is called Cross (or Stock) because it hath been fixed immovably and unchangeably, so that nothing of the Deficiency should be able to approach the eternities within the Fullness.”

Here it is useless to tie oneself to the physical symbol of a cross. The Stauros (Cross) in its true self is a living idea, a reality or root-principle. It is the principle of separation and limit, dividing entity from non-entity, being from non-being, perfection from imperfection, fullness or sufficiency from deficiency or insufficiency—Light from Darkness. It is the that which causes all opposites. At the same time it shares in all opposites, for it is the immediate emanation of the Father Himself, and therefore unites while separating. It is, therefore, the principle of participation or sharing in, sharing in both the Fullness and the Deficiency. Finally, it is the Stock or Pillar as that which “has stood, stands and will stand”—the principle of immobility, as the energy of the Father in His aspect of the supreme Individuality that changes not, because he is Lord of the ever-changing.

That such a master-idea is difficult to grasp goes without saying; it was confessedly the supreme mystery. From it the mind, the formal mind of man, “falls back unable to grasp it”; for it is precisely this personal mind that creates duality, and insinuates itself between cause and effect. The spiritual Mind alone can embrace the opposites.

But to return to our text. “When He was hung on the batos of the Cross”—when He had reached the state of balance, was in the mystic centre—then at the sixth hour, that is mid-day, when there was greatest light, there was also greatest darkness.

And then when the Lord, the Higher Self of the man, was balanced and justified, the man, the disciple, became conscious, in the cave of his heart—that is to say, in his inmost substantial nature—of the Presence of Light.