Re: [Gnosticism2] Re: Weekly Study Session #1: Definitions of Gnosis - "God's prerogative..."
- From: lady_caritasThe Gnostics spoke of an ultimate "unknown," which we have discussed before, that is beyond
conception, beyond existence. At most, what these ancients seem to
be describing is an image of this unknown. But, I view their
descriptions as metaphorical, perhaps trying to reach something
inside us beyond "sense," even though our rational, critical minds
are important to help spur us along the journey and help sort out
what isn't real...........................................................Yes, I get that impression too, I believe it was Stephan Hollier who wrote: " Philosophy explains the phenomena of life to the rational mind, but myth and ritual represent the re-emergence of the primordial reality that created the phenomena that philosophy wishes to explain. Thus, while philosophy attempts to answer the question "why?" myth and ritual reply to the question "whence?" Depth psychology teaches us that disciplines like philosophy and ethics can at best only address themselves to the conscious portion of the human psyche, but myth and ritual provide a direct, creative link to the unconscious, joining the world of the conscious ego with the deep powers of the region beyond the veil of consciousness."The Gnostic myths try to explain in words that which can not be explained in words and the use of Myths is necessary in my opinion for one tends to neglect and dissociate themselves from that which they can not explain with the rational mind. Paul writes concerning believers of the simple faith that the mysteries of the unknown God would be perceived as "..foolishness to them and they can not understand them, because they are spiritually discerned." In the Gospel of Philip it says quite plainly that "Truth did not come into the world naked but in types and images; one will not receive truth in any other way." I read an article concerning Gnosticism and the Film "the Matrix" which to me again represented a truth about Gnosticism, in that "Gnostic texts are esoteric because their meaning depends not on the public conventions of rational discourse but on correspondences hidden in the deep structure of language to which ego consciousness has no direct access." Personally I tend not to take the viewpoint of the Demiurge as being a real existent entity in his own right but rather as a powerful negative aspect of ourselves. For as the text repeatedly state that he is a 'Blind God' who can see no one greater than himself thus representing as from another analysis made about him "our narrowness of vision, our blindness to hidden realms which when accesed can animate and enlighten all our efforts. He also represents our resistance to growth of the lower order to a higher order."Nick
- --- In email@example.com, Mike Leavitt <ac998@l...> wrote:
> Hello marinas_snakeThank you. Makes me wonder though.
> On 06/11/05, you wrote:
> > "Demiurge: According to the Gnostics (as opposed to Plato and others
> > who had a more positive assessment), an inferior deity who
> > ignorantly and incompetently fashioned the debased physical world"
> Let's look at the obvious, derrevation can be negative or positive, in
> this case, the demiurge turns negative, but the idea was still
> derived from the Platonists. Gnosis has a smaller role in Platonism,
> but again Gnosis as salvation was derrived from it. Augustine
> derrived original sin (I would bet) from Manachean ideas of good and
> evil, but wound up looking quite different. Derrivation does not
> mean carrying through ideas in the same way.
> Mike Leavitt ac998_@_lafn._org remove -'s