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

12872Re: A Question for the gruop...

Expand Messages
  • pmcvflag
    Nov 14, 2006

      >>>I just felt it to be a moment of 'gnosis' as I didn't just hear
      about from a second party, or read it, I KNEW the connection I had to
      the ALL, the Unmainifest.<<<

      Ah, I see what you mean. I had thought you were connecting the
      word "Gnosis" to the experience itself, but if I understand you now
      you mean to connect it to a sort of realization that contextualized
      the experience. Is that correct? It may sound like hair splitting, but
      the destinction could actually be very very important.

      >>>It wasn't due to visualization (although I think that to be a
      usefull and necessary tool in meditation) albeit it may have been
      triggered by my contemplations on the Epinoia. I came back with
      that 'water splashed in the face feeling' and it left me irrevocably
      changed. If I had never experienced it, I would probably still believe
      as I do now, but I wouldn't KNOW. It is one thing to read about it,
      contemplate it, talk about it, but it quite another to experience it.

      You know?<<<

      Yes, I do. You mentioned in a previous post how you may have taken the
      experience fery differently if you were, say, Catholic. I think that
      is a very good and important point... and very related to the subject
      of whether it is technically "Gnosis" or not. Many people who are more
      influenced by modern esoteric traditions equate the word with the
      experience itself. It is very often that we hear people say "look, I
      had this experience so now I have gnosis". In a modern sense of the
      word that is surely true, but I do find it unfortunate that people
      feel the need to foist this modern esoteric thinking back on
      traditional Gnostic thinking in such a way that causes them to misread
      the Gnostic texts.

      In the Gnostic texts this word is simply not a single cohesive
      experiencial instance. I do see how one could read Plato and think
      that is what he meant ("like a flash of light"), or read the Gnostic
      texts and believe they are talking about the mystical experience, but
      I think a closer reading shows this to be inaccurate. I think there is
      no question that the concept of Gnosis is used to describe more than
      one aspect of revelation, comprehension, and advancement on the
      initiatory path of the ancient Gnostics. The salvific effect
      of "Gnosis" is not generally attributed to a single event so far as I
      can remember from any of the texts (unless somebody else can think of
      an example).

      One could almost wonder if perhaps in modern English rather than
      claiming to have attained Gnosis, it could be more accurate to talk
      about various gnosises in a larger concept of Gnosis.... if that makes
      any sense. Just a thought.

    • Show all 19 messages in this topic