Article Title:

The subversive use of Gnostic elements in Jorge Luis Borges’ Los Teologos and Las ruinas circulares

1

Abstract:An exploration of the ways in which Borges uses Gnostic elements in Los Teólogos and Las

ruinas circulares to subvert established Judeo-Christian notions about the world in which we

live. This article will argue that Borges in the presentation of Gnostic ideas in the course of

the stories, challenges the established Western understandings of time and history, the

nature of being and the nature of the divine. His apparent intention, however, is not

necessarily to present the Gnostic world-view as a better alternative to these, but merely to

question the dominant discourse and introduce a fundamental skepticism into the way we

think. A firm adherent to neither world-view, Borges seeks to show that all supposed

orthodoxy should be challenged as essentially misleading; life and the universe, he argues,

cannot be categorized in such absolutes.

Keys Words:Borges, Gnosticism, Latin American, Theology, Spanish Literature, Argentina

2

The subversive use of Gnostic elements in Jorge Luis Borges’ Los Teologos and Las ruinas circulares

The fiction of Jorge Luis Borges is imbued with countless philosophical, theological and

conceptual threads, and in large part it is this variety of subtleties and possible modes of

reading that contribute to his popularity and extensive critical attention. Among the disparate

intellectual aspects of his work, one particular facet which merits discussion is the use of

Gnostic elements in his short stories. In the interest of deeper analysis, this article will focus

specifically on aspects of second-century Christian Gnosticism, which given the content of

such works as his essay Una vindicación del falso Basílides [A Vindication of the False

Basilides]1 (1931), was the branch most familiar to Borges. Also for the sake of brevity, we

will limit our discussion to an analysis of two short stories which contain direct references to

Gnostic teaching: Los teólogos [The Theologians] (1947) and Las ruinas circulares [The

Circular Ruins] (1940). This article will seek to reveal the aspects of Gnosticism found in

these stories and will argue that Borges challenges the reader’s established notions of time,

the nature of being and the nature of the divine. His apparent intention, however, is not

necessarily to present the Gnostic world-view as a better alternative to these, but merely to

question the dominant discourse and introduce a fundamental skepticism into the way we

think.

Among the elements of Gnostic doctrine to be found in Los teólogos and Las ruinas

circulares, perhaps the foremost is the cyclical presentation of time and history. The concept

of time as a linear progression, which has formed the basis of our Western understanding of

history, is rooted in Christian doctrine which states for instance: ‘it is appointed unto men

once to die, but after this the judgment’ (Hebrews 9:27). The Gnostics, however, as Kennedy

highlights in a survey of the central tenets of the Basilidian system, believed that ‘the mass of

mankind will remain bound everlastingly in the endless cycle of causation and rebirth’ (1902:

392). The reader sees a reflection of this Gnostic influence in the first paragraph of Los

teólogos, which states the belief of the ‘monótonos’ [the monotones] that ‘la historia es en

3

1 All English translations are author’s own.

círculo’ [history is a circle]. The story sets up a dichotomy between the opposing symbols of

‘la Rueda’ [the Wheel], or the Gnostic, cyclical view of time, versus ‘la Cruz’ [the Cross] (¶ 1),

which represents the linear, Christian understanding of time. Phrases such as ‘un infinito

ciclo de mundos’ [an infinite cycle of worlds] (¶ 2) and ‘infinitos mundos iguales’ [infinite

identical worlds] (¶ 3) are also clear references to the Basilidian cosmology, in which the

physical world is the three-hundred and sixty-fifth emanation of the divine pleroma, or the

ultimate spiritual reality (Jaén, 1992: 87). Borges, in adopting this cosmological viewpoint,

challenges the reader’s preconceived notion of time and questions the Christian vision of

history.

Another aspect of Los teólogos which reveals this subversive agenda is the implicit

vindication of the heresy by the events of the story. Although the doctrine of cyclical time is

denounced by the protagonists Aureliano and Juan de Panonia, it is eventually shown to be

true as they unwittingly reenact Biblical events through the course of the story. Reflecting the

Gnostic belief that ‘the true prophet was repeatedly incarnated in the great prophets of all the

ages’ (Fischel, 1946: 162), the story suggests that the rival theologians reincarnate the

figures of Judas Iscariot and Jesus Christ. It is the statement, ‘Jesús no fue sacrificado

muchas veces desde el principio del mundo, sino ahora una vez en la consumación de los

siglos’ [Jesus was not sacrificed many times since the beginning of the world, but now only

once in the consummation of the centuries] (¶ 4), which is later refuted by the mirroring of

this same event. Juan de Panonia can be seen as a reflection of Jesus in the text, as he is

unjustly executed for upsetting the religious establishment of his time, becoming another

incarnation of Basilides’ one ‘true prophet’ and a representation of the circularity of history.

Several clear allusions are made to the crucifixion of Jesus which solidify this reading, such

as the conspicuous mention of the trial lasting ‘tres días y tres noches’ [three days and three

nights] (¶ 10), a number which is symbolic of the time Jesus spent in the grave (Mark 10:34),

and the unmistakeable reference to ‘una corona de paja untada en azufre’ [a crown of straw

dipped in sulfur] (¶ 11), a clear allusion to Jesus’ ‘crown of thorns’ (John 19:2). With these

references in view, it seems clear that the suffering Christ is the intended image when

4

Aureliano sees ‘el rostro del odiado’ [the face of the hated one] and the narrator informs us,

‘Le recordó de alguien, pero no pudo precisar de quien’ [It reminded him of someone, but he

couldn’t think of whom exactly] (¶ 11). These clear correlations with the Gospel accounts,

although made somewhat obliquely through creative re-imagining in the story, serve to

reinforce the doctrine of the heresiarchs who are decried in the story. Borges is thus implicitly

supporting the words of Euforbo as he is burned at the stake: ‘Esto ha ocurrido y volverá a

ocurrir’ [This has happened and will happen again] (¶ 7). Although Aizenberg has pointed out

the way in which the text can be seen to recount the Biblical story of Cain and Abel,

highlighting the similarity of Aureliano’s jealousy and the fratricide of a ‘brother’ in Christ

(1984: 118), the Judas/Jesus antithesis would appear to be much more prominent in the text

due to the references given above. In either case, however, the reader may interpret Borges’

implicit reenactment of Biblical events as a vindication of this Gnostic vision of time.

This heretical doctrine can also be seen as the underlying basis for Las ruinas circulares,

where Borges makes explicit reference to ‘las cosmogonías gnósticas’ [the Gnostic

cosmogonies] (¶ 7). As the magician realizes in the final paragraph that he is but the dream

of another, the suggestion is that this cycle of repetitions is eternal and that there are an

infinite number of worlds within worlds. Although Alazraki claims that this story ‘embodies the

Buddhist belief in the world as a dream of Someone’ (1988: 19), there is nothing in the story

which necessarily limits its world-view to Buddhism. Indeed, as Kennedy has shown, there

are many overlaps between Buddhist and Gnostic doctrine, and the former may actually

have influenced the latter (1902: 377). With a close analysis of the text, however, various

proofs emerge of Gnostic doctrine being the specific foundation for the narrative. For

instance, the magician’s dream man is given life by the invocation of ‘las sílabas lícitas de un

nombre poderoso’ [the lawful syllables of a powerful name] (¶ 5), which suggest the Gnostic

concept of the creative logos. Furthermore, that the created man does not know that he is a

dream, and the fact that his creator withholds this knowledge from him, reflects the Gnostic

doctrine that man is spiritually unenlightened and saved only by the revelation of esoteric

knowledge or gnosis. These facets of the story serve to emphasize its Gnostic focus, and the

5

circularity we therefore find in the presentation of time should be analyzed with Gnostic

doctrine in mind. The reader can see hints of this circularity throughout the story, such as

when the narrator observes, ‘A veces, lo inquietaba una impresión de que ya todo eso había

acontecido…’ [At times, he was unnerves by the feeling that all of that had already

happened] (¶ 8). The suspicion is later proven by the renewal of the ‘incendios

antiguos’ [ancient fires] (¶ 11) which leave the temple once again in ashes. The whole cycle

of the story starts again when the narrator informs us, ‘se repitió lo acontecido hace muchos

siglos’ [what had happened was repeated many centuries ago] (¶ 11). Borges thus presents

a view of time which is in line with Los teólogos and again subtly questions the Judeo-

Christian assumption that history progresses in a linear fashion.

Borges’ presentation of time in these two stories can therefore be seen to subvert the

reader’s preconceived notions and suggest that the Gnostic vision, rather than being a

heresy, may reflect aspects of reality which the Christian conception omits. Fitting in with

Borges’ idea of reality, the sense of the presentation of time in these stories is that rather

than being a straight line, with a direct correlation between cause and effect, it is an endless

circle, with events constantly mirroring each other through the ages. Critics see this not only

as a comment on perceptual reality, but also on the construct of language and process of

writing itself. Jaén posits that by this presentation of dreams within dreams, Borges is delving

into metafiction and pointing out the ‘labyrinthine nature of linguistic worlds’ (1992: 95). From

this point of view, it can be asserted that Borges’ main goal is not merely to subvert our

fundamentally Christian notions of the world and present the Gnostic vision as a better

alternative, but to transcend either viewpoint and highlight the illusory nature of our concepts

of time, history and language itself.

Another subversive Gnostic element presented by Borges in these two stories has to do with

our established notions of ontology, or the essence of being. Early Christian Gnosticism

displayed a keen ‘sense of alienation and recoil from man’s environment’ which was based

primarily on Platonic Dualism (Nock, 1964: 256). The Gnostic system created a sharp divide

6

between the physical realm, ‘entirely under the control of evil powers’, and the spiritual realm,

which was attained only by the enlightened through the revealed knowledge (gnosis) of the

fallacy of this world (Grant, 1953: 97). The material world was therefore to be rejected in

favor of the pursuit of spiritual experiences. This dual nature of man is presented in Los

teologos when the narrator comments, ‘Imaginaron que todo hombre es dos hombres y que

el verdadero es el otro, el que está en el cielo’ [They imagined that every man is two men

and that the true one is the other, the one in the heavens] (¶ 8). We also see this vision

played out in the events of the story, as the two antagonists can be seen to represent the

opposing sides of man’s nature. This is in fitting with the Judas/Jesus antithesis as discussed

above: Juan de Panonia, symbolizing Christ, can be interpreted as the spiritual side of man,

the soul; and Aureliano, conversely as Judas Iscariot, represents the material side of man,

the body. The subversive message of the text is revealed in the final paragraph where the

two men are reunited in death and are described as ‘una sola persona’ [one single person]

(¶13). In presenting this dualistic vision of man, Borges is questioning Christian orthodoxy

and blurring the line of distinction between the established notions of good and evil.

This same dualism is also to be found in Las ruinas circulares, although its presence is more

subtle. The magician in the story can be said to adhere to a Gnostic outlook in his seeming

rejection of reality in favor of the dream world, which can be equated with the spiritual realm.

The way in which he is described as being ‘consagrado a la única tarea de dormir y

soñar’ [consecrated to the singular task of sleeping and dreaming] (¶ 2) serves to imbue his

dreaming activities with religious overtones which take on increasingly more importance as

the story unfolds. The magician, in an act of rejection of the physical, is eventually able to

sleep for ‘un tiempo que ciertos narradores de su historia prefieren computar en años’ [a

period which certain narrators of his story prefer to measure in years] (¶ 10). In fact, when he

does awaken to the real world, he describes its light as ‘vana luz’ [vain light] (¶ 4), which

reflects the dullness of the Gnostic outlook of the material realm. It is also interesting to note

that the god of fire comes to life only in the dream world, whereas he is only a statue in

physical reality (or what appears to be reality). These elements of the story function to create

7

a clear divide between the dead and ashen realm of the physical, where the temples are in

ruins, the gods are forgotten and the magician is surrounded by primordial waters; and the

living, magical realm of the spirit, where statues comes to life and esoteric words are capable

of creating a living being.

It can therefore be claimed that a Gnostic, dualistic outlook forms the underlying basis of the

literary worlds found in these stories. This is not to say, however, that Borges is upholding

this vision as necessarily revealing the true essence of being. He seems rather to challenge

all rigid systems which try to codify man’s essence. His use of Gnostic dualism is then, on

one side, for the purpose of criticizing established ontological notions by the presentation of

an alternative viewpoint, and furthermore to suggest that any such notions will ultimately be

provisional (Weber, 1968: 139). Jaén supports this reading of the texts, claiming that the

ultimate goal of the dualistic ‘rejection and distrust of the perceptual and intellectual world…

appears to be a radical skepticism’ (1992: 94). These texts challenge our conception of

selfhood and expose man’s ‘dualistic, oxymoronic nature’, revealing that he is both ‘hero and

traitor, creator and dreamed creation, Christ and Judas’ (Lyon and Hangrow, 1974: 35). This

is a fundamental subversion of any system of belief which would categorize man or try to

dogmatize on the nature of his existence.

A third notion which can be seen to be challenged by Borges’ adoption of Gnostic elements

is the Christian understanding of the nature of the Divinity. Instead of the knowable, personal

God who is involved with his creation, these stories depict a god who is distant, unknowable

and uninterested in the world. Borges, in an interview in 1971, admitted his own inability to

‘believe in a personal God’, and it was perhaps his preference for the idea of a ‘vast and

impersonal God’ that led him to adopt a Gnostic vision of the divine in these stories (Flynn,

2009: 71). Indeed, what we find in these texts is a divine presence which is very like

Basilides’ ‘abstract’ and ‘remote’ deity, that is ‘unknowable and unutterable, unpredictable,

inconceivable’ (Kennedy, 1902: 398). This is certainly the feeling conveyed in Las ruinas

circulares, which although never mentioning a Supreme Being, infers an ultimate divine

8

presence in the suggestion of a dreamer behind the dreamer. The key phrase, which reflects

the Kabbalistic notion of the ineffable name of God, perfectly conveys the vastness and

impersonality of Basilides’ kind of deity: ‘pronunció las sílabas lícitas de un nombre

poderoso’ [he pronounced the lawful syllables of a powerful name] (¶ 5). These words do

give the sense of a sentient and supreme divinity, but one who’s name is too powerful and

terrifying to utter. It is this God that stands behind the illusion of reality, and even behind the

god of fire, outside of the cycle of time, controlling its revolutions. This divine presence is that

which destroys ‘las ruinas del santuario del dios del fuego’ [the ruins of the sanctuary of the

god of fire] (¶ 11) with a greater, eternal fire. There is thus a sense of God’s presence in the

story, but one which leaves the reader with the impression that he is unapproachable,

unknowable and far from benevolent.

Another outflow of the ancient Gnostic concept of an utterly disconnected God is the denial

of the incarnation of Jesus Christ; an aspect which Borges picks up on to further destabilize

the Christian notion of God and suggest that our human definitions cannot capture the divine

essence. The Gnostics, in order to reconcile the divinity of Christ with a dualistic world-view

that considered the physical world to be evil, denied the belief that Jesus had come in bodily

form (Grant, 1953: 97). This heresy taught that Jesus Christ had only appeared in the form

and image of a man and had not truly assumed human flesh: a point which is vehemently

denied in the New Testament by such statements as, ‘the Word was made flesh and dwelt

among us’ (John 1:14) and, ‘every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the

flesh is not of God’ (1 John 4:3). Allusions to this belief can be found in Las ruinas circulares,

for instance, in the fact that only the statue (the demiurge) and the magician (representing

the elect gnostikoi) know that the ‘hijo’ [son] is not ‘un hombre de carne y hueso’ [a man of

flesh and bone] (¶ 7). Only the elect have the knowledge that Jesus did not come in bodily

form, but that he is an image. Indeed, for Basilides, this was the revelation which constituted

gnosis and was the basis for man’s redemption. This rejection of the humanity of Jesus is a

fundamental challenge the central premise of Christianity and serves to remove any

sacrificial value in the crucifixion. God’s remoteness is therefore maintained because Jesus

9

Christ, the God-man who is able to sympathize with all human suffering, is denied as being

truly human.

A similar vision of God is also presented in Los teólogos. Although the final paragraph does

describe Him as a somewhat personal being, given that he converses with Aureliano, he is

shown to be completely ‘unconcerned with the agonies of the two priests’ (Flynn, 2009: 122).

The vision of God presented in the story is decidedly Basilidian, evidenced in the fact that he

regards the antagonists as one person and is indifferent to their ‘diferencias

religiosas’ [religious differences] (¶ 13). This is a God who is distanced from his creation and

who does not allow himself to be known by humanity. The description ‘insondable

divinidad’ [unfathomable divinity] (¶ 13), although partly fitting within the Christian

understanding of God’s attributes, in this context also seems to reinforce the impression that

God is unknowable. The reader might infer that even a priest, one who has dedicated himself

to the knowledge and defense of the divine, can labour his whole life to know God and in the

end be just as ignorant as the rest of humanity. This can be seen to be in agreement with the

concept of gnosis, that knowledge of the divine can only be imparted to those whom God has

chosen, by means of secret revelation. Borges, by this presentation of the divine, rather than

offering the Gnostic viewpoint as true in the absolute sense, seems to be saying that man’s

attempts to codify and understand the divine are futile and worthless.

In conclusion, this essay has attempted to reveal the subversive nature of the various

Gnostic elements which are employed by Borges in these stories and question what possible

motivation there may have been for their use. In presenting a cyclical view of time in the

texts, Borges subverts the established, Christian notion of linear history and suggests that

time is an endless circle, with events mirroring themselves and souls constantly being

reincarnated. By the adoption of a dualistic perspective, subverting such Biblical affirmations

as the goodness of creation (Gen. 1) and the call of believers into the physical world (John

17:18), Borges challenges another aspect of Christian orthodoxy and fragments any concrete

sense of being. Finally, he destabilizes the Christian view of the divinity by suggesting that

10

God is in fact distant, uninterested in his creation and completely unknowable. But beyond

these subversive statements, most critics agree that Borges is making a wider point: that

man’s endeavors to exhaustively explain reality, existence and the divine are destined for

frustration. The presentation of Gnostic ideas is not in order to uphold them as absolute truth,

but instead to suggest that the universe is beyond the comprehension and categorization of

man. A key sentence from Las ruinas circulares is the phrase, ‘Comprendió que el empeño

de modelar la materia incoherente de que se componen los sueños es el más arduo que

puede acometer un varón’ [He understood that endeavouring to shape the incoherent

material of which dreams are composed is the most arduous task a man can undertake] (¶

5). These words hint at the fundamental challenge that Borges is proposing: that to try and

compartmentalize and logicise the universe, especially the divine, is as impossible as

sculpting the immaterial substance of our dreams. Los teólogos, in the same way, also

ultimately highlights the ‘absurdity of man's endeavor to define religion and orthodoxy’ (Lyon

and Hangrow, 1974: 31). Borges therefore is not attempting to offer truth to the reader, but

merely to ‘insinuarla y estimular su búsqueda’ [insinuate and stimulate its search]

(Sosnowski, 1976: 36). The true heretics according to Borges are therefore not those who

would present alternatives to the dominant discourse, but those who would make a claim to

possessing the absolute truth about the divine and the mysteries of the universe.

11

Acknowledgements:

***

Bibliography

Aizenburg E, The Aleph Weaver: Biblical, Kabbalistic and Judaic Elements in Borges Maryland: Scripta humanistica, 1984)

Alazraki, J., Borges and the Kabbalah, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988)

Ayora, J., ‘Gnosticism and Time in “El Inmortal”’, Hispania, Vol. 56, No. 3 (1973), pp. 593-596

Borges, Jorge Luis, Los teólogos, (1947), http://www.apocatastasis.com/los-teologos-jorge-luis-borges.php#axzz1JDgVF9WQ), accessed 30/03/2011. (All quotations are taken from this digital version of the text)

Borges, Jorge Luis, Las ruinas circulares, (1949). (Digital text supplied by course tutor) All quotations are taken from the digital version of the text supplied by the course tutor.

Bos, A., “‘Aristotelian’ and ‘Platonic’ Dualism in Hellenistic and Early Christian Philosophy and in Gnosticism”, Vigilae Christianae, Vol. 56, No. 3 (2002), pp. 273-291

Fischel, H. A., “Jewish Gnosticism in the Fourth Gospel”, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 65, No. 2 (1946), pp. 157-174

Flynn, A., The Quest for God in the Work of Borges, (London: Continuum, 2009)

Franco, J., ‘The Utopia of a Tired Man: Jorge Luis Borges’, Social Text, No. 4 (1981), pp. 52-78

Grant, R., ‘The Earliest Christian Gnosticism’, Church History, Vol. 22, No. 2 (1953), pp. 81-98

Hoeller, S., ‘The Gnostic World View: A Brief Summary of Gnosticism’, http://www.gnosis.org/gnintro.htm, accessed 28/03/2011.

Jaén, D., Borges’ Esoteric Library: Metaphysics to Metafiction, (Maryland: University Press of America, 1992)

Kennedy, J., ‘Buddhist Gnosticism, the System of Basilides’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, (1902), pp. 377-415

Lyon, T., and Hangrow, P., “Heresy as Motif in the Short Stories of Borges”, Latin American Literary Review, Vol. 3, No. 5 (1974), pp. 23-35

Nock, A., ‘Gnosticism’, The Harvard Theological Review, Vol. 57, No. 4 (1964), pp. 255-279

Nuño, J., La filosofía de Borges, (Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1986)

Quispel, G., ‘Gnosticism in the New Testament’, Vigilae Christianae , Vol. 19, No. 2 (1965), pp. 65-85

Sosnowski, S., Borges y la cabala: La búsqueda del verbo, (Buenos Aires: Hispamerica, 1976)

Soud, S., ‘Borges the Golem-Maker: Intimations of “Presence” in “The Circular Ruins”’, MLN, Vol. 110, No. 4 (1995), pp. 739-754

12

Weber, F., “Borges’s Stories: Fiction and Philosophy”, Hispanic Review, Vol. 36, No. 2 (1968), pp. 124-141

Yates, D., ‘The Four Cardinal Points of Borges’, Books Abroad, Vol. 45, No. 3 (1971), pp. 404-411

13