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

6573Re: Evolution

Expand Messages
  • Will Brown
    Sep 10, 2002
      Cari, a short response. Your last paragraph of 6538:

      "I suppose this brings up a question. Both of Willy's scenarios might
      result in a shift in sense of self. Both might apply this "knowledge"
      in a practical sense in this world. Both would recognize the flaw of
      the "demiurge." But one "leaves us exactly where we are; in the
      presence of being." The other would also recognize something greater
      than "being." Can both be indicative of Gnosis? Willy, are you
      suggesting there could be a pneuma without an Objective Infinite?"

      I have two answers. The first has to do with something called the God
      Spot. The following first two sites speak to it. It could be argued
      that the God Spot is the faculty through which the Objective Infinite
      is sensed and it could be argued that it is nothing more than an
      artifact of evolution. Again, the either/or I suggested. The third
      site speaks to a drug induced NDE. If the ref. is too long, Google up
      ketamine and it is the third site listed. This suggests a
      physiological involvement to what is considered to be a spiritual




      My other answer is that there is a cognition that may be come upon in
      which a sense of Presence comes into being that infuses the sensed. My
      description would go like this: At its fullest, my sense of self is
      annulled, and having been "there" allows a sense of that Presence to
      be brought back with my sense of self, placing me in it as a
      particular within it. It is as if one's sense of self must come to an
      end within it in order to return with a piece of it. At this point,
      all is Home. This is what I call the realm of the spiritual. There is
      no room for a beyond. This is what I would call self-knowing in that
      the self, i.e., sense of self, becomes present to itself in a way that
      speaks to the prior way as being an empty sense of self, an abstract
      thing of thought, the thought of self reified, or, if you will, an
      empty box.

      If there is another self-knowing in which the sense of self itself
      that can enter that fullness, so be it. I do not know it. My
      experience is that the self must be left outside to enter; there being
      no place for it. The fullness can not entertain the particular. How
      then do we account for the two separate domains of fullness we seem to
      be speaking to? We each have separate truths. This is my either/or and
      neither is exclusive. All that I know is of a fullness that when one
      falls into it, one comes out reeking of it, and until that fall, one
      has no reek. Yet, in saying that, I must say that when one falls into
      it, no one fell into it. All but that tail will pass through the

      Of course, and this goes without saying, what I am talking about could
      have nothing whatsoever to do with Gnosticism and the few points I see
      in common are solely artifacts of my over fertile imagination.
    • Show all 19 messages in this topic