Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

#1678 - Thursday, January 15, 2004 - Editor: Jerry

Expand Messages
  • Jerry Katz
    #1678 - Thursday, January 15, 2004 - Editor: Jerry This issue features excerpts from Yale Landsberg s website on Neo-GNOSIS. It begins with excerpts from an
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 16, 2004

      #1678 - Thursday, January 15, 2004 - Editor: Jerry

      This issue features excerpts from Yale Landsberg's website on Neo-GNOSIS. It begins with excerpts from an article that summarizes Gnosticism.

      The Gnostic World View: A Brief Summary of Gnosticism
      from http://www.gnosis.org/gnintro.htm

      GNOSTICISM IS THE TEACHING based on Gnosis, the knowledge of
      transcendence arrived at by way of interior, intuitive means. Although
      Gnosticism thus rests on personal religious experience, it is a mistake
      to assume all such experience results in Gnostic recognitions. It is
      nearer the truth to say that Gnosticism expresses a specific religious
      experience, an experience that does not lend itself to the language of
      theology or philosophy, but which is instead closely affinitized to,
      and expresses itself through, the medium of myth. Indeed, one finds
      that most Gnostic scriptures take the forms of myths. The term “myth”
      should not here be taken to mean “stories that are not true”, but
      rather, that the truths embodied in these myths are of a different
      order from the dogmas of theology or the statements of philosophy.


      Gnosticism embraces numerous general attitudes toward life: it
      encourages non-attachment and non-conformity to the world, a “being in
      the world, but not of the world”; a lack of egotism; and a respect for
      the freedom and dignity of other beings. Nonetheless, it appertains to
      the intuition and wisdom of every individual “Gnostic” to distill from
      these principles individual guidelines for their personal application.


      Many esoteric teachings have proclaimed, "As it is above, so it is
      below." Our psychological nature (the microcosm) mirrors metaphysical
      nature (the macrocosm), thus Gnosticism may possess both a
      psychological and a religious authenticity. Gnostic psychology and
      Gnostic religion need not be exclusive of one another but may
      complement each other within an implicit order of wholeness. Gnostics
      have always held that divinity is immanent within the human spirit,
      although it is not limited to it. The convergence of Gnostic religious
      teaching with psychological insight is thus quite understandable in
      terms of time-honored Gnostic principles.


      The Gnostic world view has always been timely, for it always responded
      best to the “knowledge of the heart” that is true Gnosis. Yet today,
      its timeliness is increasing, for the end of the second millennium has
      seen the radical deterioration of many ideologies which evaded the
      great questions and answers addressed by Gnosticism. The clarity,
      frankness, and authenticity of the Gnostic answer to the questions of
      the human predicament cannot fail to impress and (in time) to convince.


      Yale Landsberg
      Intro to how It dually works to create non-duality
      Ludwig Wittgenstein once said, "The aspects of things that are most
      important for us are hidden because of their simplicity and
      If you take the time to read it through, you will see that what is at
      http://Neo-GNOSIS.org is the most unique description you have so far
      ever encountered about how It does Its thing so simply and so
      familiarly and so dually non-dually that It tends to slip through our
      minds' fingers like evaporating cognitive water -- until one is willing
      to wrestle with Its Heraclitean "union of O's and 1's opposites"
      Like Neo's Red Pill, the REAL Red Pill you will find is only for a
      special kind of reader, one willing to wrestle with what is both
      totally strange, and yet also strangely familiar, until he or she
      prevails over its slipperiness and elusiveness and get to see it in all
      its wholly integrated diversity.
      These are excerpts from the website of Yale Landsberg. Much has been left out and enough is presented to give the reader a taste of this gnosis. To follow the logic taking the reader from one excerpted paragraph to another, refer to the website: http://Neo-GNOSIS.org

      PART ONE
      Could it be that even the idea of there possibly being some kind of
      "set-in-stone" or re-programmable (if you know the password) master
      template of cognitive "must's", "must not's", "should's" & "should
      not's" within us, which tends to govern what we do and how we do it, so
      violates at least one of our most cherished religious or even
      scientific beliefs, that when we are given an opportunity to experiment
      with that idea, so as to wrestle with it -- and test it out -- all (but
      the most liberal) thinkers turn away from that improbable although
      possible possibility? Instead of objectively subjecting it to
      thoughtful scrutiny?
      The beginning of my (and perhaps, your) journey...
      A good many years ago, in the spirit of H.A.P. (Humor, Acceptance and
      Patience), I was luckily offered what turned out to be a miraculous
      opportunity. I was asked to solve this very enlightning puzzle: if "Ox"
      is "going away from x", and if "1y" stands for "coming towards y", what
      are "1Ox", OOx", "11y" & "O1y"? It is easy to assume that this puzzle
      is nonsense -- and that those binary combinations are meaningless. On
      the other hand, after much "contempleation" I have come to believe that
      the easily overlooked and much under appreciated "Mira! Mira! Look!
      Look!" answers to this mira-culously enlightening Puzzle, step-by-step
      logically lead to the re-creation of a "natural machine language" of
      Nature -- AND ULTIMATELY ALSO TO...
      God and Nature's "Natural" Operating System
      Part One's pointing to that one point of view in meme space that can
      help you move away from a limited view of Change and towards a more
      inner eye-opening one is reminiscent of Luis Borge's The Aleph --
      Borges' "Aleph" being a fictionalized version of a legendary though
      possibly not fictional point of view in pre and post-orthodox meme
      space, an orthogonal to conventional wisdom perspective with these
      when you properly turn away from an old point of viewing natural
      processes and towards a singularly unique new point of view in your
      mind's eye, and then also properly look at that point and from it at
      just exactly the right angle,
      and your mind does not in revulsion revolt and thus re-veil what is
      being cognitively revealed to you via what passes for a wholly
      unorthodox new and more encompassing perspective,
      you can, in some at first disorienting and then sooner or later
      reorienting way, simultaneously view all of the beautiful and vile
      comings and goings of the comings and goings... of the universe.

      ~ ~ ~
      PART TWO
      The nature of any such God and/or Nature's "natural" operating system
      is indeed confusing due as much as anything else to the nature of its
      outside-in and inside-out dual ways of "looking" at inputs and outputs.
      To make things a little easier for non-experts, this chapter begins
      with a "GNOS IS" introduction to fractal self-similarity...

      The following is a "GNOS IS" way to visualize the makings of a Koch Curve. First begin with an initial x called the "initiator" with which to initiate its construction. Then replace initiator x with some very specific replacement y called the "generator" which is used for generating the next generation. But notice that as this construction is the construction of a fractal the generator y must look in some way similar to its initiator x. E.g., a Koch Curve's initiator is a straight line of unit length, and its generator is a straight and zig-zag line, y, whose zig-zagging middle third consists of two straight line-segments,


      each of which is 1/3 of length of its original straight line initiator x.

      As you have already figured out, y is called the "generator" because y specifically specifies how to generate the fractal's next generation from its previous generation (implicitly starting with the initiating generation.)

      And now having gone through/come through the first cycle of fractally "going away from initiator x & coming to generator y", keep repeating that process, no matter how complex the result seems to get. And simply by first changing each x-like portion of y into a new x. And lastly by replacing all of those new scaled-down x's with scaled-down new y replacements. Again and again and again..


      Another example of such an iterative and recursive process is this. Should we begin with the three equal-in-size connected lines of an equilateral triangle instead of a single line, the result is this fractal version of a real-world snow-flake.

      Computerized fractal constructions are the optimal way to create realistic computerized images of natural phenomena like snowflakes, clouds, surf, shorelines, islands, continents, and all other naturally occurring shapes. Indeed, naturally occurring fractals, each with their own "going away from x" and "coming to y" recursive iterations have been found while studying natural processes as seemingly diverse as traffic flows, condensed matter, earthquakes, DNA sequences, cosmology, biology, finance, turbulence, gravity, metallurgy, etc. And thus a multi-part question about a possible, legendary unity in diversity...

      ...Is there something going on here in our new millennium's "God is dead/God is a computer" computationally intensive studies of natural processes? Yet not quite as yet coming off? Something that God and/or Nature through the work of Benoit Mandelbrot and Ilya Prigogine and others, now seems to be loudly telling us about itself and about us whenever we are willing to see the music of its artistry and listen to its mute musings? And ours? For are we not, for as long as we still remain here, part of Nature, and perhaps even (at the risk of offending some of you) the, at risk of self-sacrificing ourselves, children and parents of children and children of parents of children... of God?


      Going Away From Strife And Hopefully Towards Safety

      Fragment 45 of Heraclitus' "On Nature": Opposition unites. From what
      draws apart results the most beautiful harmony. All things take place
      by strife.

      This essay proposes that deeply contemplating the consequences of
      longer and longer strings of O's and l's (where "O" simply means "going
      away from", not zero; and "l" stands for "coming towards", not one)
      leads to the rediscovery of a naturally occurring, infinitely recurring
      master template of Nature. And that if one is willing to think
      metaphorically, this master template can be seen as both God and
      Nature's own naturally occurring to and fro' computer-like "machine
      language" -- and as God and Nature's fuzzy and Boolean logic-like
      fractally operating "natural" operating system...

      "Machine language" in the sense that any computational machine at its
      lowest level of processing requires instructions to it to be in the
      form of a particular set of digits such as O's and l's.

      "Fractal" in the sense that going away from Number 10, Downing Street
      and coming towards 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue are both:

      --simultaneously going away from the Prime Minister's residence, going
      away from the city of London and going away from the coast of Britain,
      as well as at the same time,

      --simultaneously coming towards the United States, coming towards
      Washington, D.C., and coming towards the White House.

      And "natural" as compared to more familiar "artificial" operating
      systems such as Windows, Unix, Linux, OS 360, etc., in the sense that
      logarithms to the base "e" are more "natural" than logarithms to other


      (A thought experiment follows which) assumes that you are by now open
      to the tiny but possible possibility that a Godly Nature or a Natural
      God might really be using hierarchies of program-like strings of O's
      and 1's in all of its going from state x and coming to state y


      I now rephrase the circumstances of our thought experiment thus. You
      are once again in the process of going away from initial perilous
      country x and coming towards a hopefully safer neighbor y. Only this
      time you are open to an enlightening possibility. It is -- the
      possibility -- that just as velocity is about change of position, and
      that acceleration is about change of change of position:

      so too there may be other kinds of changes, and other kinds of changes
      of changes, and other kinds of changes of changes of changes and so on,
      happening all of the time.

      All of which tend to go un-detected until we find them by first looking
      for them and then second looking at them and finally actually seeing
      them and noticing their properties -- instead of turning our cognitive
      eyes away from them.

      Thus, the crux of Neo-GNOSIS, an always and in all ways
      hidden-in-plain-sight logical pathway to rightly cross /pass over from
      absolute ignorance about God and Nature's "natural" operating system to
      a first glimmering of enlightenment about it.


      Yesterday Heraclitus the Obscure said, "All is flux".

      Today, these "resurrected" fundamental insights about God and Nature's
      OS are now added: All of nature is ever fractally ebbing/going away
      from, and flowing/coming towards, an infinite number of other comings
      and goings... of change. And if you want to see it, there is based on
      pure logic and everyday experiences a funda-mental ethos/meta-morality
      inherent in Change.

      And tomorrow?

      Maybe this "trans-cultural", "pan-ecumenical", perhaps even one day
      "scientific" observation:

      To future Science, from 'Religions' Past:

      All, ah, is 'Allah', Christ's 'First' and 'Last'.

      From ancient Crete, when all was 'Pan',

      To Humanism's 'God is Man' --

      Ezra's 'El Yah' is Rome's Jove Pater,

      and priests of Buddha's Almah Mater.

      In 'Books of Changes', (Yh Chng and Tao)

      Is Sanscrit's Yahve -- Your Sacred Cow.

      Thy 'To' is coming and 'From' is going;

      Thy never changing is E v e r - F l o w i n g . . .



      The End of this Journey for Those Who Were Destined to Reach This Destination

      By the grace of whatever you believe in, this essay has by now revealed
      to you the possibility that:

      all from x to y changes are "consciously" observing the same
      meta-"must's" & meta-"must not's" and meta-should's & meta-"should
      not's "; and in a metaphorical if not meta-physical way also,

      "con-science-iously" following the exact same meta-ethics/"good"
      standard of conduct attributed to the way God Works and/or the
      standards and standard deviations that Nature objectively subjects Her
      processes to;

      and thus we "end up" with a most natural kind of always fair to its
      principles of operations (however, not always kindly) kind of "natural"
      operating system.

      And therefore whether we seek to observe its GNOSIS answers,

      and to hear them in all of their aweful might and legendary glory --

      or we prefer to close our eyes, our minds and even our hearts to it

      -- verily, God and Nature's "Natural" Operation System" IS.

      Read the entire treatise: http://Neo-GNOSIS.org

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.