GNOSTICISM AND MODERN NIHILISM

Author(s): HANS JONAS

Reviewed work(s):
Source: Social Research, Vol. 19, No. 4 (December 1952), pp. 430-452
Published by: The New School
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40982356 .
Accessed: 06/10/2012 13:29
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The New School is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Research.

http://www.jstor.org

GNOSTICISM AND MODERN

NIHILISM
BY HANS JONAS
i

-LNIIETZSCHE,
in his time,said thatnihilism,"themostuncanny
of all guests,""standsbeforethe door."x Meanwhilethe guest
is
has enteredand is no longera guest,and,as faras philosophy
him.
in
to
live
with
existentialism
is
concerned,
Living
trying
suchcompanyis livingin a crisis. The beginnings
of thecrisis
reachbackintotheseventeenth
wherethespiritualsituacentury,
tionofmodernmantakesshape.
thissituation,the one that
Amongthe featuresdetermining
Pascalfacedin all itsawfulimplications
and expoundedwiththe
fullforceofhiseloquenceis man'sloneliness
in thephysicaluniverseof modernscience. "Cast into the infiniteimmensity
of
and whichknowme not,I am
spacesof whichI am ignorant,
"Which
know
me
not": morethanthe overawing
frightened."
ofthesilentspacesandoflimitless
cosmictime,morethan
infinity
the quantitative
the
of man as a
disproportion, insignificance
in thisvastness,
morethantheseit is theutterindiffermagnitude
- thenotenceof theCopernicanuniverseto humanaspirations
knowingof thingshumanon the partof thatwithinwhichali
- whichconstito be enacted
thingshumanhave preposterously
tutestheutterloneliness
ofmanin thesumof things.
As a partofthissum,manis onlya reed,liable to be crushed
at anymoment
ofan immense
and blinduniversein
bytheforces
whichit is but a particular
blindaccident. As a thinking
reed
he is no partofthesum,notbelongingto it,but radicallydifferforthe res extensadoes not think,and
ent,incommensurable,
- body,matter,
natureis nothingbut resextensa
externalmagnil Der Wille zur Macht, 34.

GNOSTICISM AND MODERN NIHILISM

431

whilehe,being
tude. Ifshecrushes
him,shedoesso unthinkingly,
notbecause
is awareofbeingcrushed.He alonethinks,
crushed,
ofbutin spiteofhisbeingpartofnature. If he hasno sharein
nature
whichhas becomea foreignspectacle,
nature'sgrandeur,
has none in his innerconcerns. Thus thatwhichmakesman
mind,no longer
superiorto all nature,his unique distinction,
of his beinginto the totalityof
resultsin a higherintegration
markstheunbridgeable
gulfbetween
being,but on thecontrary
fromthecommunity
himself
and therestofexistence.Estranged
of beingin one whole,his consciousness
onlymakeshim a fortellsofthis
eignerin theworld,and in everyactoftruereflection
starkforeignness.
This is thehumancondition.There is no longerthe cosmos
withwhoseimmanent
logosmyowncan feelkinship,no longer
theorderof thewholewhichgivesmeaningto man'spartin it,
andtherefore
tohisplacein it. That placeappearsnowas a sheer
and shocked,"continues
and bruteaccident. "I am frightened
Pascal,"at beinghereratherthanthere;forthereis no reason
whyhereratherthanthere,whynowratherthanthen." There
had alwaysbeen a reasonbefore,so longas theworldhad been
as life'scosmichome. But Pascalspeaksof "thisremote
regarded
cornerof nature"in whichman has to "regardhimselfas lost,"
of "thelittlecell in whichhe findshimselflodged,I mean the
in thescheme
universe."The uttercontingency
ofman'sexistence
a
of
human
sense
as
that
scheme
any
deprives
possibleframeof
forman'sunderstanding
of himself.
reference
But thereis moreto thissituationthan the meremood of
and dread. The indifference
ofnature
homelessness,
forlornness,
to ends. Withtheejecalso meansthatnaturehas no reference
fromthesystem
ofnaturalcauses,nature,herself
tionofteleology
ceased to provideany sanctionto possiblehuman
purposeless,
A
of being,as
hierarchy
purposes. universewithoutan intrinsic
the Copernicanuniverseis, leaves values ontologically
unsupand
the
self
is
thrown
back
itself
in
its
entirely
ported,
upon
quest
formeaningand value. Meaningis no longerfound,but is

432

SOCIAL

RESEARCH

"given." Values are no longer beheld in the vision of objective

reality,but are positedas featsof valuation. As functionsof the
will theyare solelymy own responsibility.Will replacesvision;
temporalityof the act ousts the eternityof the "good in itself."
This is the Nietzscheanphase of the situationin whichEuropean
nihilism breaks the surface. Now man is alone with himself.
The world'sa gate
muteand chill.
To desertsstretching
Who once has lost
What thou hast lost standsnowherestill.
Thus spoke Nietzsche (in Vereinsamt)-closing the poem with
theline, "Woe unto himwho has no home!"
Pascal's universe,it is true,was still one createdby God, and
solitaryman, bereftof all mundane props,could still stretchhis
heartout towardthe transmundaneGod. But this God is essentiallyan unknownGod, an agnostostheos,and is not discernible
in the patternof his creation. The universedoes not reveal his
purpose by its order of created things,or his goodnessby their
abundance, or his wisdom by their fitness,or his perfectionby
thebeautyofthewhole- but revealssolelyhis power,by itsmagnitude, its spatial and temporalimmensity. And thoughthe contingencyofman,ofhis existinghereand now,is stilla contingency
upon God's will,thatwill,whichhas castme intojust "thisremote
cornerofnature,"is inscrutable,and the "why?"ofmyexistenceis
here just as unanswerableas atheisticexistentialismmakes it out
to be. The deus absconditus,ofwhomnothingbut will and power
can be predicated,leaves behind as his legacy,upon leaving the
scene,thehomoabsconditus,a conceptof man characterizedsolely
bywill and power- thewill forpower,thewill to will.2
The point that particularlymattersfor the purposes of the
presentdiscussionis thata changein the visionof nature,thatis,
2 The role of Pascal as the firstmodernexistentialist,
whichI have here very
roughlysketchedas a startingpoint, has been more fullyexpoundedby Karl
in Measure,A CriticalJournal
Lowithin his articleon "Man BetweenInfinites,"
(Chicago), vol. i (1950),fromwhich also the quotationsfromPascal have been
borrowed.

GNOSTICISM AND MODERN NIHILISM

433
ofthecosmicenvironment
ofman,is at thebottomof thatmetaphysicalsituationwhichhas givenriseto modernexistentialism
and to itsnihilistic
implications.But if thisis so, if theessence
between
of existentialism
is a certaindualism,an estrangement
manandtheworld,withthelossoftheideaofa kindredcosmos
- thenit is not necessarily
in short,an anthropological
acosmism
modernphysicalsciencealonewhichcan createsucha condition.
it
A cosmicnihilismas such,bywhatever
historical
circumstances
in whichsomeof
wouldbe thecondition
mayhavebeenbegotten,
And the
evolve.
thecharacteristic
traitsof existentialism
might
extentto whichthisis foundto be actuallythecase wouldbe a
to thedescribedelement
testfortherelevance
whichwe attribute
in theexistentialist
position.
and one onlythatI knowof in thehisThereis one situation,
- on a leveluntouchedby anything
toryof Westernman,where
- thatconditionhas been
modernscientific
thought
resembling
realizedand livedout withall the vehemenceof a cataclysmic
or themoreradicalones
event. That is theGnosticmovement,
and
the
movements
whichthe
various
Gnostic
teachings,
among
deeplyagitatedfirstthreecenturiesof the Christianera proliferatedin theHellenisticpartsof theRomanempireand beyond
we mayhope to
its easternboundaries.Fromthem,therefore,
foran understanding
of thatdisturbing
learnsomething
subject,
and I wishto put theevidencebeforethereaderas far
nihilism,
as thiscan be donein thespaceofa briefessay.
n

The existence
of an affinity
or analogyacrosstheages,suchas is
herealleged,is notso surprising
ifweremember
thatin morethan
one respecttheculturalsituationin the Greco-Roman
worldof
first
Christian
centuries
the
showsbroadparallelswiththemodern situation. Spenglerwentso faras to declarethe two ages
in thesenseof beingidenticalphasesin the
"contemporaneous/1
lifecycleoftheirrespective
cultures.In thisanalogicalsensewe
in
wouldnowbe living theperiodoftheearlyCaesars. However

SOCIAL RESEARCH
434
thatmaybe, thereis certainlymore than merecoincidencein the
fact that we recognizeourselvesin so many facetsof later postclassical antiquity. Gnosticismis one of those facets,and here
as it is renderedby the strangenessof the
recognition,difficult
with
the
shockof the unexpected,because it fits
comes
symbols,
neitherthe pictureof an age which a superficialhistoricalconsciousnesscharacterizes
mostlyby Stoicismand Epicureanism,nor
the pictureof modernnihilismas- in line with the Nietzschean
- essentiallya post-Christian
definition
phenomenon.
as more or
In the followingdiscussionI referto existentialism
I cannotdo the same witti
less a knownquantity. Unfortunately
Gnosticism. It lies offthe main road of historicalknowledge,
and philosophersdo not usually come acrossit. I am therefore
compelledto dwell much more on the Gnosticside of my subject
than a just balance in the comparisonwould warrant. In the
however,I do not see how thislopsidednessin my
circumstances,
presentationcan be avoided.
The term Gnosticrefersto a group of religious doctrinesat
the beginningof our era whicheitherexplicitlyidentifiedthemselvesby the word gnosisor implied it as a centralpoint of their
message.3 Gnosis means knowledge,and the historicalconnotaancientand modern,
tionsofthetermhave causedmanyobservers,
to see in Gnosticismtheinroadof Greekphilosophyinto Oriental
religious thought. In content,manner,and aim, however,the
"knowledge"of the Gnosticshas littleto do withrationalthought,
and the Hellenic associationsof the name are more misleading
thanenlightening.
Also easily misleading is the fact that the majority of the
recordedGnosticsectsappear withinthe still fluidboundariesof
the earlychurch,thus investingthe veryname, in the minds of
observers,withthe meaningof a Christianheresy,a mere epiphe3 What follows is a brief summaryof certain basic features of Gnosticism. The
full argument for the view presented here, which differsfrom the conventional
one, may be found in my Gnosis und sptantiker Geist, vol. i (Gttingen 1934).
Note also two articles of mine on this subject in Theologische Zeitschrift(Basel) :
vol. 4, no. 2 (1948) , and vol. 5, no. 1 (1949)-

GNOSTICISM AND MODERN NIHILISM

435
nomenonto Christianity.
has shown
Modernresearch,
however,
theexistence
ofnon-Christian
as well,coincident
Gnosticreligions
in thedecliningancientworld,and
withtheriseof Christianity
thereis evidenceevenof pre-Christian
Gnosticism.As a matter
offact,theGnosticmovementsuchwe mustcall it- wasa comin thosecriticalcenturies,
feedinglike
prehensive
phenomenon
humansituaon theimpulsesof a widelyprevalent
Christianity
in
and
therefore
tion,
erupting manyplaces,manyforms,and
manylanguages.
hereis theradicallydualThe salientfeatureto be emphasized
isticmoodwhichunderliesthewholeGnosticattitudeand unifies
which
thewidelydiversified,
moreor lesssystematic
expressions
thatattitudegaveitselfin Gnosticritualand literature.It is on
ofa dualisticmood,a passionately
humanfoundation
thisprimary
dualisticdoctrines
feltexperienceof man,thatthe formulated
rest. The dualismis betweenman and the world,and concurbetweentheworldand God. It is a dualitynotof supplerently
but of contrary
and
terms,a polarityof incompatibles,
mentary
Gnosticeschatology.Basicto it is thefeeling
thisfactdominates
ofan absoluteriftbetweenmanandthatin whichhe findshimself
lodged:theworld. The feelingis explicatedin termsofdoctrine.
In itstheological
aspectit statesthattheDivinehas no partand
in
no concern the physicaluniverse;thatthe trueGod, strictly
is not revealedor even indicatedby the world,
transmundane,
thetotallyOther,unknowable
and is therefore
theUnknown,
in
terms
ofanyworldly
in
its
analogies.Correspondingly, cosmological aspectit statesthattheworldis thecreationnot of God but
ofsomeinferior
principle;and,in itsanthropological
aspect,that
man'sinnerself called thepneuma is not partof the world,
of nature'screationand domain,but, withinthatworld,is as
and as unknownby all worldlycategories
as
totallytranscendent
the
unknown
is itstransmundane
God
without.
counterpart,
That theworldis createdbysomeoneis generally
notdoubted
in
some
of
the
in themythological
subtler
systems
(though
systems
fromortsof divinity
is contemplated).
a sortof darkautogenesis

SOCIAL RESEARCH
436
But whoeverhas createdtheworld,man,accordingto Gnosticism,
does not owe him allegiance; and neitherhis creation,though
incomprehensiblyencompassingman, nor his proclaimed will
offersthe standardsby which man can set his course. Since the
true God cannotbe the creatorof thatto whichselfhoodfeelsso
utterlya stranger,nature must have been created by a lowly
demiurge,a powerfarremovedfromthesupremesourceof Being,
a perversionof the Divine, retainingof it only the power to act,
but to act blindly,withoutknowledge;he createdthe world out
of ignoranceand passion.
Thus theworldis theproduct,and even essentiallythe embodiment,of the negativeof knowledge. What it reveals is unenlightenedand thereforemalignant force,proceeding from the
spiritof self-assertive
power,fromthe will to rule and coercewhich,as spiritual,is foolishand bearsno relationto understanding and love. The laws of the universeare the laws of thisrule,
and not of divine wisdom. Thus the essence of the cosmos is
ignorance (agnosia). In this negativitythe idea of knowledge
(gnosis)findsits firstapplication,an applicationin the privative
mood. The positivecomplementis in the fact that the essence
of man is knowledge:thisdeterminesthe situationof man as that
of the knowingin the midstof the unknowing,of light in the
midstof darkness,and thisrelationis at the bottomof his being
alien,withoutcompanionshipin the darkvastnessof the universe.
That universehas none of thevenerability
of the Greekcosmos.
Contemptuousepithetsare applied to it: "these miserable elements" (paupertinahaec elementa),"thispunycell of thecreator"
- bothquotationsfromMarcion,thesecond
(haec cellula creatoris)
offeringliterallythe same expressionthat we found in Pascal.
Yet it is stillcosmos,an order- but orderwitha vengeance. Not
only is the name cosmosretainedfor the world; it is called that
now witha new and fearfulemphasis,an emphasisat once awed
troubledand rebellious,forthatorder is alien
and disrespectful,
to man's aspirations. The blemishof naturelies not in any deficiency of order,but in the all too pervadingcompletenessof it.

GNOSTICISM AND MODERN NIHILISM

437

thatantitype
Far frombeingchaos,thecreationofthedemiurge,
of knowing,
is a comprehensive
system,
governedby law. But
cosmiclaw,onceregarded
ofa reasonwithwhich
as theexpression
is now
man'sreasoncan communicate
in the act of cognition,
man'sfreeseenonlyin its aspectof compulsionwhichthwarts
dom. The cosmiclogosof theStoicsis replacedby heimarmene,
cosmicfate.
oppressive
is dispensedby the planets,or the starsin
This heimarmene
oftheinexorableand hostilelaw
general,themythical
exponents
oftheuniverse.The changein theemotional
oftheterm
content
cosmosis nowherebettersymbolized
than in thisdepreciation
oftheformerly
mostdivinepartofthevisibleworld,thecelestial
- whichfromPlatoto theStoicswas the
sky
spheres.The starry
the paraof reasonin thecosmichierarchy,
purestembodiment
ofthedivinenatureofreality
andtherefore
digmofintelligibility
withthefixedglareofalien
man
in
the
face
as such nowstared
and not providence.
powerand necessity.Its rule is tyranny,
withwhichall sidericpietyup to
Deprivedof the venerability
and
of theprominent
thenhad investedit,but stillin possession
representative
positionit had acquired,this stellarfirmament
to man in the
becomesnow thesymbolof all thatis terrifying
factness
of theuniverse.Underthispitilesssky,which
towering
manbecomesconscious
no longerinspiresworshipful
confidence,
of his beingnot so mucha partof,but
of his utterforlornness,
in
system.
unaccountably
placed andexposedto,theenveloping
otherness,disAnd,likePascal,he is frightened.His solitary
eruptsin the feelingof elecoveringitselfin thisforlornness,
mood of being-in-thedread. Dread as a fundamental
mentary
but in the
worldfirstbecamearticulatenot in existentialism
of its
Gnosticwritings.It is theself'sreactionto the discovery
in
an
that
it
situation,actuallyitself element
discovery: marks
of
the awakeningof selfhoodfromthe slumberor intoxication
the
inmost
theworld;it is thewayin which
spiritbecomesorigithat
it
fact
is
not reallyits own,
of
the
of
itself
and
aware
nally
executorofcosmicdesigns. Knowlbutis rathertheinvoluntary

438

SOCIAL

RESEARCH

edge, gnosis,mightliberate man fromthis servitude;but since

the cosmosis contraryto life, the savingknowledgecannot aim
at the knower'sintegrationinto the cosmicwhole,cannot aim at
compliance with the laws of the universe,as did Stoic wisdom,
of universal
which sought freedomin the knowingaffirmation
necessity. For the Gnostics,contraryto the Stoics,man's alienation is not to be overcome,but is to be deepened and pushed to
the extremeforthe sake of the self'sredemption.
in

let us stopto askwhathas herehappened

Beforegoinganyfurther,
to the old idea of the cosmosas a divinelyorderedwhole. Certainlynothingcomparableto modernphysicalsciencewas involved
in this catastrophicdevaluation or spiritual denudation of the
universe. We need only observe that this universe became
demonizedin the Gnosticperiod. Yet this,takenwith
thoroughly
of theacosmicself,resultedin curiousanalogies
the transcendence
modern
in the vastlydifferent
to the phenomenaof existentialism
whatcaused,forthehuman
setting. If notscienceand technology,
groupsinvolved,the collapse of the cosmospietyof classicalcivilization,on whichso much of its ethicswas built?
The answeris certainlycomplex,but at least one angle of it
may be brieflyindicated. The classical ontologicaldoctrineof
whole and parts- accordingto which the whole is prior to the
parts,is betterthan the parts,and is that for the sake of which;
the partsare and whereintheyfindthe meaning of their existence- had lostthe social basis of itsvalidity. The livingexample
of such a whole had been the classicalpolis, whose citizenshad a
stake in the whole, and could affirmits superior status in the
knowledgethatthey,theparts,howeverpassingand exchangeable,
maintainedit withtheirown being,and thattheiractionsmade
to thebeingand perfectionof thewhole. This whole,
a difference
the conditionfor the existenceand wellbeingof the individual,
of man's
was thus in addition the frameworkfor the fulfilment
aspirations.

GNOSTICISM AND MODERN NIHILISM

439
The ontologicalprinciplesurvivedthe conditionsof its conofthecitystatesintothemonarchies
ception.Withtheabsorption
of the Diadochs and finallyinto the Roman empire,which
the
of its constructive
function,
deprivedthepolis intelligentsia
relationno longerheld politically. But Stoic pantheism,
the
forit
of post-Aristotelian
monism,substituted
physico-theology
therelationbetweenthe individualand the cosmos,the larger
theclassicaldoctrineofwhole
livingwhole. Bythissubstitution
and partswaskeptin forceeventhoughit no longerreflected
the
actual situationof man. Now the cosmoswas declaredto be
thegreat"cityofgodsand men,"and to be a citizenof theuniwasnowconsidered
to be thegoal bywhich
verse,a cosmopolites,
otherwise
isolatedmancouldsethis bearings. He was asked,as
it were,to adoptthecauseof theuniverseas his own,thatis, to
himself
withthatcausedirectly,
acrossall intermediaries,
identify
and to relatehisinnerself,to relatehis logos,to thelogosof th
whole.
The practicalside of thisidentification
in his affirmconsisted
and
the
role
him by the
allotted
to
ing
faithfully
performing
whole,in just thatplace in whichcosmicdestinyhad set him.
"To playone'spart"- thatfigure
ofspeechon whichStoicmorals
dweltso much unwittingly
revealsthefictitious
elementin the
structure.A role playedis substituted
fora real functionperformed.The actorson thestagebehave"as if" theyactedtheir
choice,and "as if"theiractionsmattered.Whatactuallymatters
is onlyto playwellratherthanbadly,withno genuinerelevance
to the outcome. The actors,bravelyplaying,are theirown
audience.
In the phraseof playingone's part thereis a bravadothat
hidesa deeperdespair,and onlya shiftin attitudeis neededto
viewthegreatspectaclequite differently.
Does thewholereally
care,doesitconcernitselfin thepartthatis I? The Stoicsaverred
withpronoia,cosmicfate
thatit does by equatingheimarmene
withprovidence.And does mypart,howeverI play it, really
does it makea difference
to the whole? The Stoics
contribute,

440

SOCIAL

RESEARCH

averredthatit does by theiranalogybetweenthe cosmosand the

of the
city. But the verycomparisonbringsout the artificiality
for- in contrastto whatis truein thepolis no case
construction,
can be made out formyrelevancein the cosmicscheme,whichis
entirelyoutsidemycontroland in whichmypart is thusreduced
to a passivitywhichin the polis it had not.
To be sure,the strainedfervorby which man's integrationin
to it, was
the whole was maintained,throughhis alleged affinity
the meansof preservingthe dignityof man and therebyof saving
a sanctionfor a positivemorality. This fervor,succeedingthat
which had formerlybeen inspiredby the ideal of civic virtue,
representeda heroic attempton the part of the intellectualsto
forceof that ideal into fundamencarryover the life-sustaining
the new atomized masses of the
But
conditions.
tally changed
empire,who had never shared in that noble traditionof arete,
to a situationin which theyfound themreactedverydifferently
selvespassivelyinvolved: a situationin whichthe part was insignificantto the whole, and the whole alien to the parts. The
Gnosticaspirationwas not to "act a part" in this whole, butin existentialistparlance- to "exist authentically." The law of
empire, under which they found themselves,was an external
dispensationof dominating,unapproachableforce;and, forthem,
the samecharacterwas assumedby the law of the universe,cosmic
destiny,of which the world state was the terrestrialexecutor.
The veryconceptof law was modifiedin all its aspects- natural
law, politicallaw, morallaw.
I leave it to the reader to draw whateveranalogies there are
betweenthisalienationof man fromhis world and the situation
of atomizedindustrialsociety. Such analogies,I am sure,would
supplementfromthe social angle the effectsI have attributedto
the cosmologyof modernscience,on the testimonyof Pascal. As
in late antiquity,so today,the term"world" containstwo meanings at once: nature in general,and social reality. And it may
determinesman's relation
well be the latterwhich preeminently
of
the
sum
to "the world,"
things.

GNOSTICISM AND MODERN NIHILISM

441

IV

The subversion
of the idea of law, of nomos,leads to a moral
of the Gnostic
in
the nihilisticimplications
which
consequence
and at the same timethe analogyto the Nietzscheacosmism,
strainofexistentialism,
becomeevenmoreobviHeidegger-Sartre
ofGnosticism.
ousthanin thecosmological
aspect:theantinomism
- therejecthat
antinomism
it
is
to
be
conceded
To beginwith,
tionofanyobjectivenormofconduct is arguedon vastlydifferGnosenttheoretical
levelsin thetwocases,and thatantinomistic
in comparison
ticismappearscrude,and perhapsless profound,
of antiwiththe subtletyand pitilesshistoricalself-elucidation
Whatis beingliquidated,in theonecase,
nomistic
existentialism.
is themoralheritageof a thousandyearsof ancientcivilization;
addedto this,in theother,are twothousandyearsof Occidental
to theidea of a morallaw.
as background
Christian
metaphysics
Nietzscheexpressedtherootof the nihilisticsituationin the
phrase"God is dead," meaningprimarilythe ChristianGod.
the metaphysical
if askedto summarize
The Gnostics,
similarly
couldhavesaidonly"theGod of the
basisoftheirownnihilism,
cosmosis dead"- is dead,thatis,as a god,hasceasedto be divine
thelodestarforour lives. Admitforus and therefore
to afford
and thus
in thiscase is lesscomprehensive
tedlythecatastrophe
less irremediable,
but the vacuumthatwas left,even if not so
wasfeltno lesskeenly.
bottomless,
To Nietzschethe meaningof nihilismis that "the highest
and the cause of
valuesbecomedevaluated"(or "invalidated"),
thatwehavenottheslightest
thisdevaluation
is "theinsight
justifior an 'in itselfof things,
cationforpositinga transcendence,
4 This utterance,
incarnate."
whichis 'divine/whichis morality
takenwiththatabout the deathof God, bearsout Heidegger's
that"thenamesGod and ChristianGod are in Nietzstatement
used to denotethetranscendental
sche'sthought
(supra-sensible)
worldin general. God is thenamefortherealmof ideas and
4 Wille zur Macht, 23, 24; cf. ibid., 4, "to live alone, 'withoutGod and
morals.'"

442

SOCIAL

RESEARCH

ideals" (Holzwege,p. 199). Since it is fromthisrealm alone that

any sanctionforvalues can derive,its fading,that is, the "death
of God," meansnot onlythe actual devaluationof highestvalues,
but the loss of the verypossibilityof obligatoryvalues as such.
To quote once more Heidegger's interpretationof Nietzsche,
"The phrase 'God is dead* means that the transcendentalworld
is withouteffective
force."
In a modified,ratherparadoxical way this statementapplies
also to the Gnosticposition. It is true,of course,thatits extreme
dualism is of itselfthe veryoppositeof an abandonmentof transcendence. The transmundaneGod representstranscendencein
themostradicalform. In him theabsolutebeyondbeckonsacross
the enclosingcosmic shells. But this transcendence,unlike the
"intelligibleworld" of Platonismor the world lord of Judaism,
does not stand in any positiverelationto the sensibleworld. It
is not the essenceof thatworld,but its negationand cancelation.
The Gnostic God, as distinctfromthe demiurge,is the totally
countertheother,the unknown. Like his inner-human
different,
part, the acosmic self or pneuma, which,otherwisehidden, also
revealsitselfonlyin the negativeexperienceof otherness,of nonidentification
and of protestedindefinablefreedom,this God has
more of the nihil than the ens in his concept. A transcendence
withdrawnfromanynormativerelationto the worldis equal to a
force. In otherwords,
transcendencewhichhas lost its effective
forall purposesof man's relationto existingreality,this hidden
God is a nihilisticconception:no nomos emanatesfromhim, no
law fornatureand thusalso no law forhuman conductas a part
of the naturalorder.
On this basis the antinomisticargumentof the Gnosticsis as
simple as for instancethat of Sartre. Since the transcendentis
silent,Sartreargues,since "thereis no sign in the world," man,
the "abandoned," reclaimshis freedom,or rather,cannot help
takingit upon himself:he "is" thatfreedom,man being "nothing
but his own project,"and "all is permittedto him."5 That this
5 L'existentialisme
est un humanisme,
pp. 33 ff.

GNOSTICISM AND MODERN NIHILISM

443

freedom
is ofa desperate
nature,and,as a compassless
task,inspires
dreadratherthanexultation,
matter.
is a different
In Gnosticreasoning
meetthemerely
we sometimes
subjectivist
formof theantinomistic
bad or
is
naturally
argument:
nothing
human
in
and
themselves
are
indifferent, onlyby
good, things
are
actions
or
bad.
opinion
good
Spiritualman,in thefreedom
of hisknowledge,
use of themall. Whilethis
has theindifferent
remindsone of nothingmorethanof classicalSophism,thereal
to thissuperficially
metaphysical
background
skepticalsubjectivismcomesto lightin thedeeperGnosticreflection
on thesource
ofsuchhumanopinions.
The ultimate
sourceturnsouttobe nothumanbutdemiurgical,
and commonwiththatof theorderof nature. Its product,the
butis partofthegreatdesign
"law/1is thusnotreallyindifferent,
upon our freedom. Being nomos,the moralcode is but the
to the physicalnomosand, as such,the
psychicalcomplement
internalaspectof the all-pervading
cosmicrule. Both emanate
fromthelordof theworldas agenciesof his power,unifiedin
the double aspectof the JewishGod as creatorand legislator.
Justas thelaw of thephysicalworld,theheimarmene,
integrates
theindividualbodiesintothegeneralsystem,
so the morallaw
thesouls,and thusmakesthemsubservient
to thedemintegrates
scheme.
iurgic
Forwhatis thelaw- eitheras revealedthrough
Mosesand the
or
as
in
the
actual
habits
and
prophets
operating
opinionsof
men butthemeansofregularizing
andthusstabilizing
theimplicationofmanin thebusinessof theworldand worldlyconcerns;
of setting
ofpraiseand blame,
byitsrulestheseal of seriousness,
rewardand punishment,
on his utterinvolvement;
of making
his verywill a compliantpartyto thecompulsory
which
system,
will
function
all
the
more
and inextricably?
In
thereby
smoothly
so faras theprincipleofthismorallaw is justice,it has thesame
character
of constraint
on thepsychical
side thatcosmicfatehas
on thephysicalside. "The angelsthatcreatedtheworldestablished'justactions/to lead menbysuchprecepts
intoservitude"

444

SOCIAL

RESEARCH

(Simon Magus). In the normativelaw man's will is takencare of

by the same powersthat dispose of his body. He who obeys it
has abdicated the authorityof his self.
It is not possiblehere to go into the anarchicaland sometimes
libertinisticconsequencesof this attitude. Incidentally,the conor ascetic,and actually,except
sequencescan be eitherlibertinistic
fora briefperiod of revolutionary
extremism,
theyhave probably
more oftenbeen the latterthan the former. But the two seeminglyoppositeattitudesare reallyof the same root,and are capable of strangecombinations. The same basic argumentsupports
themboth. The one repudiatesloyaltyto naturethroughexcess,
the otherthroughabstention. The one sometimesmakes of the
a positiveobligationto performevery
permissionto do everything
kind of action,withthe idea of renderingto nature its own and
therebyexhaustingits powers; the other floutsthose powers by
denyingthem opportunityand reducing commercewith them
to the minimum. Both are lives outside the law. Freedom by
abuse and freedomby non-use,equal in theirindiscriminateness,
are thus only alternativeexpressionsof the same acosmism.
The referenceto thisroot makesit clear that,farbeyondwhat
the merelyskepticalargumentof "subjectivism"suggests,there
was a positivemetaphysicalinterestin repudiatingallegiance to
anyobjectivenorm. It was the assertionof the authenticfreedom
of theself. But it is to be noted thatthisfreedomis not a matter
of the "soul," which is as adequately determinedby the moral
law as thebodyis by the physicallaw; it is whollya matterof the
pneuma, the indefinablespiritualcore of existence,the foreign
spark. The soul, psyche,is part of the naturalorder,createdby
the demiurgeto envelop the foreignpneuma, and in the normativelaw the creatorexercisescontrolover what is legitimatelyhis
own. Psychicalman,definablein his naturalessence,forinstance
as rationalanimal,is still naturalman, and is no more admitted
to be the authenticallyexistingselfof the pneuma than in modern existentialismany determinativeessenceis admittedto prejudice authenticexistence.

GNOSTICISM AND MODERN NIHILISM

445

It is pertinent
here to comparean argumentof Heidegger's.
of man as the rationalanimal,
Againstthe classicaldefinition
in
Letter
on
his
Humanism,
arguesthatthisdefiniHeidegger,
tionplacesman withinanimality
onlyby a differentia
specified
whichfallswithinthe genus"animal"as a particularquality.
is placingmantoolow. I suspectthere
contends,
This,Heidegger
is a verbalsophisminvolvedin thus arguingfromthe term
"animal"as usedin theclassicaldefinition.But apartfromthat,
in hisrejectionof theconceptof anydefinable"nature"of man
whichwouldsubjecthis sovereign
existenceto a predetermined
essenceand thusmakehimpartofan objectiveorderof essences
- in thiswholeconceptionof trans-essenin thewholeof nature
- thereis a significant
existence
tial,freely"projecting"
analogy
of the
to the Gnosticconceptof the trans-psychical
negativity
peculiarto
pneuma. This pneumais thebearerof a knowledge
of
fromtherationalknowledge
itselfwhichis radicallydifferent
thepsyche. Psychicalman,throughhis reason,owesallegiance,
thedemiurge,
indeed,to themorallaw laid downbyhiscreator,
it he has the onlychanceof being
and in obediently
fulfilling
established
just, thatis, properly"adjusted"to the externally
in
the
allotted
cosmic
scheme.
his
thus
of
and
order,
part
playing
But thepneumticos,
"spiritual"man,is above the law,beyond
and
and
a
law unto himselfin the power of his
evil,
good
"knowledge."
Only in passingI wish to remarkthat Paul's antinomism,
thoughsharingin the generalclimateof the Gnosticone, is a
matter. It certainlydoes not grantfreedom
vastlydifferent
fromthe law to any superior"knowledge."
v
But whatis thisknowledge
about,thiscognitionwhichis not of
thesoulbut ofthespirit,and in whichthespiritualselffindsits
oftheValensalvationfromcosmicservitude?A famousformula
thecontentofgnosis:"Whatmakes
tinianschoolthusepitomizes
who
we were,whatwe have become;
us freeis theknowledge

SOCIAL RESEARCH
446
wherewe were,whereinwe have been thrown;wheretowe speed,
wherefrom
we are redeemed; what is birthand what rebirth."6
A real exegesis of this programmaticformula would have to
unfold the complete Gnosticmyth. Here I wish to make only
a few formalobservations.
Firstwe note the dualisticgroupingof the termsin antithetical
pairs,and the eschatologicaltensionbetweenthem,with its irreversibledirectednessfrompast to future. We furtherobserve
thatall thetermsused are conceptsnot of being but of happening,
of movement. The knowledgeis of a history,in which it is
itselfa criticalevent.
Amongthesetermsofmotion,the one of having"been thrown"
into somethingstrikesour attention,because we have been made
familiarwith it in existentialistliterature. We are reminded
of spaces,"of Heidegof Pascal's "Cast into the infiniteimmensity
been
thrown,"which with him is
ger's Geworfenheit;"having
of
a fundamentalcharacterof the Dasein, of the self-experience
Gnostic.
is
I
as
can
existence. The term,as far
see, originally
In the Mandaean literatureit is a standingphrase: life has been
throwninto theworld,lightinto darkness,the soul into the body.
It expressesthe original violence done to me in makingme be
whereI am and what I am, the passivityof my choicelessemergence into an existingworld whose law is not mine. But the
imageof the throwalso impartsa dynamiccharacterto the whole
of the existencethus initiated. In our formulathis is taken up
by the image of speeding toward some end. Ejected into the
world, life is a kind of trajectoryprojectingitselfforwardinto
the future.
This bringsus to the last observationI wish to make apropos
the Valentinian formula: that in its temporal terms it makes
no provisionfora presenton whosecontentknowledgemaydwell
and, in beholding,stay the forwardthrust. There is past and
future,where we come fromand where we speed to, and the
presentis only the momentof gnosis itself,the peripetyfrom
e ClemensAlex.,Exc. ex Theod.,78, 2.

GNOSTICISM AND MODERN NIHILISM

447
theone to theotherin a supremecrisisoftheeschatological
now.
There is thisto remark,however,in distinction
to all modern
the
it
context
makes
clear
that,thoughthrowninto
parallels:
we had an originin eternity,
and so also have an
temporality,
aim in eternity.This constitutes
a metaphysical
to
background
innercosmic
nihilismwhichis entirelyabsentfromits modern
counterpart.
let me put
To turnonce moreto the moderncounterpart,
beforeyouan observation
whichmuststriketheclosestudentof
und
Sein
Zeit, thatmostprofoundand still most
Heidegger's
manifesto
of existentialist
important
philosophy.In thisbook
an
the
selfaccording
to themodes
of
Heidegger
develops ontology
in whichit exists,thatis to say,in whichit constitutes
itsbeing
in
a
its
modes
are
number
of
and
these
by existing,
explicated
fundamental
whichHeideggerprefers
to call "existencategories
of Kant,theydefinestructials." Unliketheobjectivecategories
- of the activemovement
turesnot of realitybut of realization
and the
ofinwardness
bywhicha worldofobjectsis entertained
event. Theyhave,therefore,
as a continuous
each
selforiginated
'
tials"are
and all, a profoundly
temporalmeaning. The 'existen
the
mental
true
dimension
of
internal
or
of existtime,
categories
in itstenses. This being
thatdimension
ence,and theyarticulate
distribute
between
and
must
the
themselves,
so, they
exhibit,
threehorizonsof time past,present,and future.
Nowifwe tryto arrangethese*'existen
catetials,"Heidegger's
underthesethreeheads,as it is possibleto do,
goriesofexistence,
- at any rate one thatstruckme
we makea striking
discovery
verymuchwhenI madeitmanyyearsago (at thetimeevengoing
in theclassicalmannerofa "table
so faras to drawup a diagram,
thatthecolumnunderthe
ofcategories").This is thediscovery
head of "present"remainspractically
empty. I musthastento
is an extremeabridgeand whatfollows,
add thatthisstatement,
about
theexistential
a greatdealis said
ment. Actually
"present."
But it is nothingoriginalin its own right. As faras the term
is meantto denotean aspectof genuine"existence,"it is the

448

SOCIAL

RESEARCH

'
presentof the 'situation/'which is whollydefinedin termsof
the self'srelation to its "future"and "past." It flashesup, as
it were, in the light of decision when the projected "future"
reactsupon thegiven"past,"and in thismeetingconstituteswhat
calls the "moment" (Augenblick):moment,not duraHteidegger
- a creatureof the other
tion,is thetemporalmode of thispresent
two horizonsof time,a functionof theirceaselessdynamics,and
no independent dimension to dwell in. Detached, however,
fromthiscontextof innermovement,by itself,"present"denotes
preciselythe renouncementof genuine future-pastrelation in
the "abandonment" or "surrender"to talk, curiosity,and the
like (Verfallenheit):a failureof the tensionof true existence,a
a negativeterm
kind of lazinessof being. Indeed, Verfallenheit,
whichalso includes the meaningof degenerationand decline, is
the "existential"proper to "present"as such, showingit to be
a derivativeand "deficient"mode of existence.
To return,then, to our original statement,we find that all
the relevantcategoriesof existence,those having to do with the
possible genuinenessof existence,fall in correlatepairs under
the heads of eitherpast or future: "facticity,"necessity,having
become,having been thrown,are existentialmodes of the past;
being ahead of oneself,anticipationof death, care and resolve,
are existentialmodes of the future. No present remains for
genuine existenceto repose in. Leaping off,as it were,fromits
past, existenceprojectsitselfinto its future; faces its ultimate
limit,death; returnsfromthis eschatologicalglimpseof nothingness to its sheer factness,the unalterable datum of its already
havingbecome this,thereand then; and carriesthisforwardwith
its death-begottenresolve, into which the past has now been
gatheredup. I repeat,thereis no presentto dwell in, only the
crisis between past and future,the pointed moment between,
balanced on the razor'sedge of decisionwhich thrustsahead.
This breathlessdynamismholds a tremendousappeal for the
mind,and my generationin the German twenties
contemporary
succumbed to it wholesale. But there is a
thirties
and early

GNOSTICISM AND MODERN NIHILISM

449

of thepresentas theholderofgenuine
puzzlein thisevanescence
in its reductionto the inhospitable
zero pointof mere
content,
standsbehindit?
formalresolution.Whatmetaphysical
situation
Herean additionalobservation
is relevant.Thereis,afterall,
thepresenceof
besidestheexistential
"present"of themoment,
withthemafforda "present"
things. Does not the co-presence
ofa different
kind? Butwe learnfromHeideggerthatthingsare
zuhanden,thatis, usable (of whicheven "useless"is
primarily
relatedto the "project"of existence,
a mode),and therefore
therefore
includedin the future-past
dynamics.Yet theycan
also becomemerelyvorhanden(standingbeforeme), that is,
is an objecindifferent
objects,and themodeof Vorhandenheit
side is Verfallenheit,
to whaton theexistential
tivecounterpart
falsepresent. Vorhandenis what is merelyand indifferently
"extant,"the "there"of bare nature,thereto be lookedat outside the relevanceof the existentialsituationand of practical
concern. It is being,as it were,strippedand alienatedto the
- a
modeof neutralobject. This is the statusleftto "nature"
- and the relationin whichit is so
mode of reality
deficient
fromthe
its defection
modeofexistence,
is a deficient
objectified
of
mere
into
the
of
care
onlooking
spuriouspresent
futurity
curiosity.
of the conceptof nature (the
This existentialist
depreciation
absenceof "nature"as a relevanttopic fromHeidegger'sphiitsspiritual
reflects
fact)obviously
losophyis in itselfa revealing
at thehandsofphysicalscience,and it has something
denudation
fornature. No philosophy
in common
withtheGnosticcontempt
has everbeen lessconcernedaboutnature,which,forit,has no
with
dignityleftto it: thisunconcernis not to be confounded
fromphysicalinquiryas beingabove man's
Socrates'refraining
understanding.
To look at whatis there,at natureas it is in itself,at Being,
theoria. But
theancientscalledby thenameof contemplation,
is leftwith only the
the point here is that,if contemplation
extant,thenit losesthe noble statusit once hadirrelevantly

SOCIAL RESEARCH
450
as does the repose in the presentto which it holds by the presence of its objects. Theoria had that dignitybecause of its
- because it beheld eternal objects in the
Platonic implications
formsof things,a transcendenceof immutable being shining
through the transparencyof becoming. Immutable being is
everlastingpresent,in which contemplationcan share in the
briefdurationsof the temporalpresent.
Thus it is eternity,not time, that grantsa presentand gives
it a statusof its own in the flux of time; and it is the loss of
eternitywhich accountsforthe loss of a genuine present. Such
a loss of eternityis the disappearanceof the world of ideas and
ideals in which Heidegger sees the true meaning of Nietzsche's
"God is dead": in otherwords,the absolutevictoryof nominalism
over realism. Thereforethe same cause which is at the root of
nihilismis also at the root of the radical temporalityof Heidegger's scheme of existence,in which the presentis nothingbut
the momentof transiencefrompast to future. If values are not
beheld in vision as being (like the Good and the Beautiful of
Plato), but are positedby the will as projects,then indeed existwith death as the goal;
ence is committedto constantfuturity,
and a merelyformalresolutionto be, withouta nomos for that
resolution,becomesa projectfromnothingnessinto nothingness.
In the words of Nietzschequoted before,"Who once has lost
what thou hast lost standsnowherestill."
VI

Once more our investigationleads back to the dualism between

man and physisas the metaphysicalbackgroundof the nihilistic
situation. There is no overlooking one cardinal difference
betweenthe Gnosticand the existentialistdualism: Gnosticman
is throwninto an antagonistic,anti-divine,and thereforeantione. And only
human nature,modernman into an indifferent
the lattercase representsthe absolutevacuum,the reallybottomless pit. In the Gnosticconceptionthe hostile,the demonic,is
and the
familiareven in its foreignness,
still anthropomorphic,

GNOSTICISM AND MODERN NIHILISM

451
- a negativedirection,
contrast
itselfgivesdirectionto existence
to be sure,but one thathas behindit thesanctionof thenegative transcendence
to whichthe positivity
of the worldis the
qualitativecounterpart.Not even this antagonistic
qualityis
to
the
indifferent
natureofmodernscience,andfromthat
granted
natureno directionat all can be elicited.
This makesmodernnihilisminfinitely
moreradicaland more
than
Gnostic
nihilism
ever
could
be, forall its panic
desperate
terrorof the worldand its defiantcontempt
of its laws. That
naturedoesnotcare,onewayor theother,is thetrueabyss. That
onlyman cares,in his finitudefacingnothingbut death,alone
withhis contingency
and the objectivemeaninglessness
of his
is a trulyunprecedented
situation.
projecting
meanings,
But thisdifference,
whichrevealsthegreaterdepthof modern
Gnosticdualism,
nihilism,also challengesits self-consistency.
fantastic
as it was, was at least self-consistent.
The idea of a
demonicnatureagainstwhichthe self is pitted,makessense.
Butwhataboutan indifferent
naturewhichnevertheless
contains
in its midstsomething
to whichits own being does make a
difference?The phraseof havingbeen flunginto indifferent
natureis a remnantfroma dualisticmetaphysics,
a phraseto
whoseuse the existentialists'
own monisticbeliefsgivethemno
What
throw
the thrower,
is
the
without
and withouta
right.
beyondwhenceit started?Rathershouldthe existentialist
say
- has been "thrown
thatlife- conscious,
caring,knowingself
up"
bynature. If blindly,thentheseeingis a productof theblind,
thecaringa productof theuncaring,
a teleological
naturebegottenunteleologically.
Does not thisparadoxcast doubton the veryconceptof an
of physicalscience? So radiindifferent
nature,thatabstraction
been
has
banned
fromthe conceptof
cally
anthropomorphism
naturethatevenman mustcease to be conceivedanthropomorphicallyif he is justan accidentof thatnature. As theproduct
of theindifferent,
hisbeing,too,mustbe indifferent.
Then the
would
warrant
the reaction"Let
simply
facingof his mortality

SOCIAL RESEARCH
452
us eat and drink for tomorrowwe die." There is no point in
caringforwhathas no sanctionbehindit in anycreativeintention.
- that,facingour
But if the deeper insightof Heideggeris right
finitude,we find that we care, not only whetherwe exist but
how we exist- then the mere factof therebeing such a supreme
care, anywherewithin the world, must also qualify the totality
which harborsthat fact,and, having given rise to it physically,
cannot be only the indifferentexternalityof a-teleological
science.
The disruptionbetweenman and totalrealityis at the bottom
of nihilism. The illogicalityof the rupturemakesits factno less
real, or its seeming alternativemore acceptable: the stare at
isolated selfness,to which it commitsman, may seek releaseand has foundit- in a monisticnaturalismwhich,along withthe
rupture,would abolish also the idea of man as man. Between
thatScyllaand thisher twinCharybdis,the modernmind hovers.
Whethera thirdroad is open to it- one by whichthe fataldualism can be overcomeand yetenoughof the dualisticinsightsaved
to uphold thehumanityof man- philosophywill have to findout.