Uważam się za heretyka i za gnostyka, i szczycę się, że nim jestem”. Jerzego Prokopiuka ezoteryczna recepcja gnozy i gnostycyzmu

In the paper, the author presents Jerzy Prokopiuk’s (1931–2021) outlook on gnosis and Gnosticism. Prokopiuk was a Polish esotericist, translator, and non-academic specialist in religious studies. His views on this subject can be divided into four areas: (1) definition of gnosis; (2) the essence and...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Zeszyty naukowe Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Studia religiologica 2021-01, Vol.54 (3), p.269-284
1. Verfasser: Dobkowski, Mariusz
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng ; pol
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:In the paper, the author presents Jerzy Prokopiuk’s (1931–2021) outlook on gnosis and Gnosticism. Prokopiuk was a Polish esotericist, translator, and non-academic specialist in religious studies. His views on this subject can be divided into four areas: (1) definition of gnosis; (2) the essence and de- scription of Gnosticism as a historical religious formation; (3) description and understanding of the post-Gnostic tradition; (4) gnosis and Gnosticism as a hermeneutic tool. As to (1) definition of gno- sis, the Prokopiuk presents three forms of this special kind of knowledge: escapist gnosis (know- ledge liberates the human spirit from material body and the physical world); transformational gnosis (knowledge transforms the human soul, body and earthly nature); lateral gnosis (idea of alternative worlds). Regarding (2) Gnosticism, Prokopiuk says that its source was ancient mysteries and a par- ticular type of religious experience. He sees (3) the post-Gnostic tradition as an unbroken chain of esoteric groups and figures from late antiquity to the present day. Finally, gnosis and Gnosticism are (4) a hermeneutic tool for Prokopiuk because they allow him to interpret phenomena and texts of culture (in the field of literature, cinema, psychology, and others). The paper also reflects on the usefulness of some of Prokopiuk’s ideas for contemporary humanities.
ISSN:0137-2432
2084-4077
DOI:10.4467/20844077SR.21.017.16554