Gnostic Fullness vs. Buddhist Emptiness: The True Path to Pleroma

 

Gnostic Fullness vs. Buddhist Emptiness: The True Path to Pleroma**  

One of the fundamental differences between Gnosticism and Buddhist thought, particularly in its Theravāda and Mahāyāna expressions, lies in the concept of **fullness** (*pleroma*) versus **emptiness** (*śūnyatā*). While some claim that Mahāyāna Buddhism, especially in its Dzogchen and Kashmiri Shaivite interpretations, aligns with Gnostic cosmology, this is ultimately a misrepresentation of the Gnostic pursuit of divine wholeness.  

### **The Gnostic Desire for Fullness**  

The **Pleroma** in Gnostic thought represents the totality of divine attributes, the realm of true existence. Gnosticism does not seek to **empty** itself into nothingness but to be **filled** with divine knowledge (*gnosis*), wisdom, and life. This is a direct contrast to the Buddhist concept of liberation, which often involves dissolving the self into an ungraspable void.  

As the *Apocryphon of James* states:  

*"Do you not, then, desire to be filled? And your heart is drunken; do you not, then, desire to be sober? Therefore, I say to you, 'Become full, and leave no space within you empty, for he who is coming can mock you.'"*  

Then Peter replied, *"Lo, three times you have told us, 'Become full'; but we are full."*  

The Savior answered and said, *"For this cause I have said to you, 'Become full,' that you may not be in want. They who are in want, however, will not be saved. For it is good to be full and bad to be in want. Hence, just as it is good that you be in want and, conversely, bad that you be full, so he who is full is in want, and he who is in want does not become full, as he who is in want becomes full, and he who has been filled, in turn, attains due perfection. Therefore, you must be in want while it is possible to fill you, and be full while it is possible for you to be in want, so that you may be able to fill yourselves the more. Hence, become full of the Spirit, but be in want of reason, for reason <belongs to> the soul; in turn, it is (of the nature of) soul."* (*Apocryphon of James*)  

This passage makes it clear: Gnosticism calls for the **filling of the spiritual self**, not its annihilation.  

### **Emptiness vs. Fullness: Why Gnosticism Rejects Buddhist Śūnyatā**  

In Buddhist thought, particularly within Theravāda and certain strains of Mahāyāna, the idea of *śūnyatā* (emptiness) is central. The goal is to realize that all things are devoid of intrinsic selfhood, ultimately leading to the dissolution of personal identity. In contrast, Gnostic thought holds that **the self is not an illusion to be erased but a divine fragment to be restored and filled with light**.  

Jesus does not instruct his disciples to seek **nothingness** but rather **fullness**. If emptiness were the goal, he would have taught them to abandon their longing for divine knowledge. Instead, he repeatedly tells them to **become full**, for only those who are **filled with truth and Spirit** will reach salvation.  

### **The Danger of Spiritual Emptiness**  

Buddhist emptiness leaves the door open for **deception and spiritual stagnation**. As Jesus warns, *"Leave no space within you empty, for he who is coming can mock you."* An empty vessel can be filled with anything—including falsehood. This is why Gnosticism does not advocate the destruction of the self but its **transformation** through the reception of divine knowledge.  

If we accept Buddhist emptiness as a valid path, we contradict the fundamental Gnostic understanding that **we are meant to be filled with divine knowledge, not emptied into nothingness**. The fullness of Pleroma is not a void—it is the highest reality, the ultimate truth.  

### **No Pleroma in Buddhism**  

While some attempt to link Mahāyāna concepts like *"form is emptiness, emptiness is form"* to the **Pleroma**, this is a misunderstanding of both systems. The **Pleroma is not empty—it is the** **fullness of divine reality**. Buddhist thought, on the other hand, ultimately seeks to **deconstruct the notion of inherent being altogether**. The end goal of Buddhism is **nirvāṇa**, the cessation of existence as a distinct self. The goal of Gnosticism is **union with the divine**, the restoration of the self within the fullness of Pleroma.  

### **The True Path: Fullness in Christ**  

Jesus is called **the Light of the world, the Illuminator of knowledge**. He did not teach a doctrine of negation but one of **awakening and restoration**. In John 10:10, he declares:  

> *“I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly.”*  

This **abundant life** is the opposite of the Buddhist idea of self-dissolution. The Gospel of Thomas reinforces this idea:  

> *"If you bring forth what is within you, what you have will save you. If you do not bring forth what is within you, what you do not have will destroy you."*  

What is within us? **The divine spark, the potential for fullness**. We are meant to awaken to it, not extinguish it into emptiness.  

The idea that Gnosticism and Buddhism are fundamentally similar collapses under scrutiny. **Gnosticism seeks the fullness of divine knowledge, while Buddhism aims for emptiness and self-negation**. The *Apocryphon of James* directly instructs us to **become full and leave no space empty**, affirming that **true salvation is about filling ourselves with divine knowledge and the presence of Christ**.  

### **Conclusion: A Call to Seek Fullness, Not Emptiness**  

If we take the words of the *Apocryphon of James* seriously, we cannot embrace Buddhist emptiness as a legitimate spiritual path. Jesus’ repeated command to **become full** shows that true salvation comes through **receiving and dwelling in divine knowledge, not by erasing the self into void**.  

A Gnostic does not want to be **empty**—we want to be **filled** with the fullness of the Aeon.  

Those who seek emptiness remain vulnerable to deception. But those who **seek the Fullness (Pleroma) through Christ** will inherit the Kingdom of God.