5911[Gnosticism] Re: Thomasine Metaphor or universal microcosm?
- May 24, 2002Been on a bit of a sabbatical, just catching up. Actually, I don't
really have much to say concerning the overall conversations since
for the most part what everyone has said here seems to flow pretty
rationally. There is only one thing that stands out to me as
something that really needs clerification, and that is from Play.
Play, I'm not sure that you are completely clear on exactly what the
Gnostic "Prime Source" refers to. I could be wrong, and simply have
misread you, but I get this impression from things you have said
like the following cut and paste....
>Who views "the world" as flawed? Us [humans] or the Prime Source?<You see, the Prime Source doesn't "view". You seem to have the
impression that the Prime Source (Bythos) is a being, like some kind
of God.... it isn't. You mention this as a "question that hasn't
been answered", but it is difficult to answer since the question
itself doesn't exactly make sense from the traditional Gnostic
perspective. I did in fact attempt at one point to answer, I guess
it just didn't come across right so I'll try again. The Prime Source
is infinity, absolute infinity. Bythos does not hear, see, think,
feel, provide, love, punnish, dictate, create, or even interact, it
is not a "who". I guess that that removes one half of your question,
and thus answers it.
Your next question on the other hand is more readily dealt with...
>What exactly is meant when you use the words "the world"? Do youmean human society, religion and culture? Or do you mean all of it?<
(in reference to what is flawed) The "world" is the field of
opposites, which is removed from infinity by it's dependance on
linear movement. In other words, "opposites" or "contrast" is a
split and another term for "split" can be "flaw" if we assume there
is something that is not "split". Therefore (from our perspective),
material existance is less than the implication of what is beyond
it, and thus "flawed". This of course means everything, anything you
can concieve, feel, think, experience, is experiencable because of
the "flaw" or "split" from non-time (at least this is the Gnostic
perspective, which answers the first question again).
You also state...
>If there really is one God, One Source, then remnants of who thissource is should exist in every religion on this planet.<
That is a strong "if". What if, on the other hand, "God" is
something we made up to create rules... sometimes for good, other
times for bad. You are making an assumption of a God that I don't
make, and you will find that many Gnostic texts are trying to
overcome that very notion of "God". One God? Balderdash.
You then go on to state that God is in all things. There is a word
for that, it is "Pantheism". Gnostics are not pantheists though, and
I make no such assumption that "God is in all things", or that God
is good, etc. You continue from that with this ...
>To my satisfaction at least, after detailed research andexperience, it no longer is just a theory. It has become common
knowledge to me now and I wish to share it with others like you who
are close to raising "the veil" in your life.<
Without the other assumptions though, this means nothing. My
research is also detailed, and in some ways it is very scientific
and logical as well. How do you know that it is not I who have
raised the veil, and you who are only close (I'm not saying this is
the case, only that it is presumptuous to assume)? I have a
completely different experience (as do the other Gnostics here), and
most of us have already at one time believed as you do and left that
belief behind (right or wrong).
>I can provide all sorts of references, ideas and quotes on allsorts of topics to clearly present my case if anyone here is
Well, that is fine... for what it's worth. Actually, you gave us a
little story about a Christin who goes to heaven after praying for
the Massiah. I thought I would point out to you that this is
originally an old Jewish parable, whomever you got it from simply
revamped it into a Christian instead of a Rabbi (see "Treasury of
Jewish Folklore", ed Ausubel) just thought I would point that out
for technical accuracy sake.
>And because of these thoughts, you are filled with love andcompassion and will someday gain gnosis.<
?, I'm not sure you mean the same thing as Gnostics do when you use
the word "gnosis". That being the case, how do you know that Lady
Cari has not passed us all up in that persuit... including you? Take
your terms "love" and "compassion" and then look back to the
explination of the Prime Source. Since Gnosis is a cognisence of the
Prime Source you will see that "love" and "compassion" are not
relevent to what Gnostics mean by the word "Gnosis" as anything more
than steps that can become traps in and of themselves. Granted, you
may mean something else by the word, but since this is a traditional
Gnostic forum, we go by the original usage here. Perhaps then you
can clerify what you meant by the word and we may have another word
to describe it.
I do not mean to invalidate what you are saying, I simply mean to
point out that it is nothing new to most of us. It is however
something I disagree with... at least as I understand you to mean
(and like I said, I could have misunderstood your intent).
(Peering throught the wake of a shark and whale, the minnow rears
it's terrible head and utters a mighty gurgle that nats and smaller
insects tremble at... at least if they fall in the water
unexpectantly without something to crawl out of the water onto [in
which case the only mock all the harder]. All the while trying to
avoid the shark an the whale's mouths, "Oh yeah big creatures?" it
exclaims, "Ha! I pick my morsels from the teeth of the Leviathan and
the toes of the Behemoth, and they care not. Frolic not in my home
without some caution master Moby!". :P [that is THE raspberry for
those of you unfamiliar with internet emoticons])
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>