13036Re: [Gnosticism2] Re: Mysticism a Regressional Experience?
- Apr 3, 2007Blessings, Thomas!Wanted to respond off group, we will get a perverbial finger shook at us, I have run into this on G2 before; it was made very clear to me that they want to discuss gnoticism strictly in the academic and historical sense, not in the reality of an experience of gnosis. They aren't bad, they just miss the point. Its their group. If I may suggest another group I am on that discusses the mystical experience of gnosis is http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Real-Gnosis/ . The owner(?) of the group is Dick Richardson, a personal friend of mine and mystic, altho he doesn't care for the 'religion' of gnosticism. He runs the Psychognosis network, and there is much to be learned from him, if you are seeking info about the experience of gnosis.Now, that said, I agree with you, that our Root, (Dick calls it the Ground of Being, I call it the ONE, or the Great Unmanifest), is what few experience, but it does rejuvinate the spirit. I had two seperate and distinctly different experiences as OBEs that I am still discovering the truth.Could you describe your experinces? What preceeded, what it was like (as much as you can use our crude language to describe such a wonderfully subtle experiences)? If you are interested, I can describe mine as well.Walk in Light and Love!!whirled and inner peasLeigh (DarkChylde)Gnothi Seauton
Thomas Wycihowski <tjwycihowski@...> wrote:--- In gnosticism2@ yahoogroups. com, "Verna Leigh Johnson"
<imdarkchylde@ ...> wrote:
> Brightest Blessings, Thomas!
> What a blessed name! You aren't kin to the famous (infamous?)
> brothers that made the Matrix, are you?
> I agree with you on a few of your points. As a beginner
> I am still discovering the 'truth' of the Garden of Eden story, but
> am a Valentian to the core, so to speak, and that is what still
> resonates within me, like scratching an itch that bugged me for so
> It is interesting you consider 'agnostic' to be "intuitive
> without the framework of conceptual thought." Knowledge is gnosis,
> not a 'collection of data, but 'knowledge' (as used by the Hebrew
> definition and alike in the Greek and Latin as well) thus a,
> anti, meaning 'against' would be without knowlegde in its technical
> But I understand your meaning, as I have had such 'mystical'
> exeriences (altho I didn't know they were when I had them) in the
> form of OBEs, NDEs, and some I don't think have a 'classification' ,
> (or at least not one that can be pinned down). But having visted
> Ground of Being, the Great Unmainfest, the Father of the Entirety,
> whatever pigeonhole you wish to use, I can tell you there is NO
> THINKING there, only an 'awareness' of self (not ego). I have not
> been told this, I KNOW this. You may contact me on my personal
> if you wish, as I have found this may not meet the definition of
> classification of Gnosticism in the traditional (an to some no
> existant) sense and such discussions may not be encouraged, but I
> will still put in my two cents.
> Whirled and inner peas
> my email is imdarkchylde@ ...
> Gnothi Seauton
> --- In gnosticism2@ yahoogroups. com, "Thomas Wycihowski"
> <tjwycihowski@ > wrote:
> > I'm continually fascinated by the story of the Garden of Eden
> > it's various version in Gnostic books.
> > My take is that the Garden was a mystical experience that many
> > people of different religious experiences experience. In a book
> > Transpersonal writer Ken Wilber, he more or less dissess Eden as
> > pre-egoistic state where the differentiation between the self and
> > outside worn't exist.
> > I disagree with that. In my opinion, the eating of the Tree of
> > Knowledge of Good and Evil was a divorcing of the counscious
> > being from the mystical sense of oneness that existed before.
> > was the "Fall" into matter.
> > Thge author makes regression seem to be inicimal to spiritual
> > progress. I belkeive that is a false dychotomy. My own
> > that it IS a form of Gnosis, I call Agnosis, or intuitive
> > without the framework of conceptual thought.
> > Anyways, a lot of mystical experience seems like to me a
> > to a earlier stae of perception and cognition.
> > So do you think that some mystical experiences are regressive in
> > nature?
> I have had what I would term "blissful" experiences. But I guess
the way I get to it might be different then some people.
While I am a hetrosexual in the general sense of the term, I'm
also an AB (Adult Baby). So basically, my experience of these
blissfull experiences, the closest I could say I got to "mystical",
was ina "regressed" frame of mind.
I really beleive the biggest problem people have is they seek to
continually advance. While this is necessary in life (that which does
not grow dies), I also beleive we all must at times return to our
Root for rejuvanation. I find it to be a spiritual experience, myself.
I am more of a Sethian, in that I beleive the Sethian line is the
inheritors of the Gnosis. Ultimately, these experiences are so
different, that they can't be framed mentally. In the mundane sense,
what can't be named or labelled can't be "known". But then how does a
baby "know" his mothers love? How do we "know" someone loves us.
Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection.
Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>