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

Re: [Gnosticism2] The Mind's Eye

Expand Messages
  • Tsharpmin7@aol.com
    In a message dated 9/4/2005 6:52:28 AM Central Standard Time, mercyboxfan@yahoo.com writes: I guess what I am trying to do is my feeble attempt at distancing
    Message 1 of 10 , Sep 4, 2005
      In a message dated 9/4/2005 6:52:28 AM Central Standard Time, mercyboxfan@... writes:
      I guess what I am trying to do is my feeble attempt at distancing
      Gnosticism from the orthodox Christianity that I grew up with. I don't
      want to fall victim to just replacing one crutch for another. It seems
      to me if there are no angels, no demons, no devil, literally, then there
      is no literal demiurge or sophia or aeons. I understand and appreciate
      the fact that Gnostics use these myths as metaphors and the
      fundamentalist are all together more literal, but still it seems lonely
      sometimes that there is no Sophia to cry to for wisdom, just ourselves.
      I think that my most convenient way of understanding the Gnostic myths
      is through my only and literal learned behavior with orthodox
      Christianity. I am so sorry to be so confused.

      Thanks for any input,
      Anne Marie
      hello, Anne Marie.  i don't know how long you've been in the game, so to speak, but it appears to me you have a budding awareness of the limitations of orthodoxy -- be it Christian or Gnostic -- as well as a desire to transcend the ordinary modes of perception and being.  i admire this in you.  your confusion may be no more than a consequence of your chosen journey which, let's face it, flies against the prevailing winds of a culture that treasures artificial certainties and sleepy beliefs over the triumph of wisdom and the virtue of those who seek, persevere and see.  that is the way of intolerance, the blind god, the Demiurge. 
       
      you can be in the world but not of the world:  cultivate positive friendships and lose the negative relationships, surround yourself with joyful people -- people who actively and effectively work for a better world; look outward and love like its nobody's business.  this is virtuously being in the world.  yet work equally hard to find and recognize your true self and your connection to the Beloved.  persevere.  discover the wisdom that is not of this world yet resides with you always.
       
      continue to cultivate your "Mind's Eye."  continue to reject, and go beyond, the carrot and the stick, the fear and hope which are but the secondary and immature vehicles with which most people approach the Beloved.  that is a path of unworthiness.  instead "quench the fires of Hell and burn Heaven, so that both these barriers to understanding shall vanish from the eyes of pilgrims, so that they may seek Truth without hope or fear (Rabia)."
       
      your friend,
       
      Crispin Sainte III
    • lady_caritas
      ... is real or a metaphor, the answer is, simply, Yes. ... to create one. As the old saying goes, If God did not exist we would be obliged to create
      Message 2 of 10 , Sep 4, 2005
        --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "j.j.salt" <jj_salt@y...> wrote:

        >
        > So whenever I have a question in my mind as to whether something
        is "real" or a "metaphor," the answer is, simply, "Yes."
        >
        > If you need a literal Sophia, and you don't find one, then you need
        to create one. As the old saying goes, "If God did not exist we
        would be obliged to create Him." (Who did say that, anyway? I'm
        blocking who it was. If anybody knows, I'd appreciate being
        reminded.)
        >
        > In Unity,
        > j.j.salt


        Hi, Durak.

        That would be Voltaire:
        http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=776218


        Cari
      • lady_caritas
        ... need ... By the way, where on earth did you pick up your nickname Durak ? You do *not at all* appear to be the fool. ;-) Cari
        Message 3 of 10 , Sep 4, 2005
          --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, lady_caritas <no_reply@y...>
          wrote:
          > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "j.j.salt" <jj_salt@y...> wrote:
          >
          > >
          > > So whenever I have a question in my mind as to whether something
          > is "real" or a "metaphor," the answer is, simply, "Yes."
          > >
          > > If you need a literal Sophia, and you don't find one, then you
          need
          > to create one. As the old saying goes, "If God did not exist we
          > would be obliged to create Him." (Who did say that, anyway? I'm
          > blocking who it was. If anybody knows, I'd appreciate being
          > reminded.)
          > >
          > > In Unity,
          > > j.j.salt
          >
          >
          > Hi, Durak.
          >
          > That would be Voltaire:
          > http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=776218
          >
          >
          > Cari

          By the way, where on earth did you pick up your nickname "Durak"?
          You do *not at all* appear to be the "fool." ;-)

          Cari
        • Nick Lawrance
          From Anne Marie I guess what I am trying to do is my feeble attempt at distancing Gnosticism from the orthodox Christianity that I grew up with. I don t want
          Message 4 of 10 , Sep 4, 2005
            From Anne Marie
            I guess what I am trying to do is my feeble attempt at distancing
            Gnosticism from the orthodox Christianity that I grew up with. I don't
            want to fall victim to just replacing one crutch for another. It seems
            to me if there are no angels, no demons, no devil, literaly, then there
            is no literal demiurge or sophia or aeons. I understand and appreciate
            the fact that Gnostics use these myths as metaphors and the
            fundamentalist are all together more literal, but still it seems lonely
            sometimes that there is no Sophia to cry to for wisdom, just ourselves.
            I think that my most convenient way of understanding the Gnostic myths
            is through my only and literal learned behaviour with orthodox
            Christianity. I am so sorry to be so confused.

            Thanks for any input,
            Anne Marie

            ...........................................

            I think the Gnostics tended to see a reality expressed in myth and metaphor to explain the sorrowful condition we find ourselves in; I obtained this for a website dealing with Valentinan ideas:

            "They believed that the experience expressed through the myth was real and that through visionary experiences (gnosis) and ritual one could experience the events it described. Thus the "myth" is not merely a teaching story. It is a metaphorical description of the experience of redemption."

            As for wisdom not being around, it is there but not to be cried upon; Stevan Davies has to say concerning the Gospel of Thomas especially in reference to saying 14 that turns completely upside down the traditional viewpoints of  orthodox Christian salvation: "Thomas consistently expresses confidence in the human ability to discover hidden truth without any direct divine help or intervention. If you rely on divine help through prayer, or on repentance through fasting, or on obedience through acts of charity, you are going in the wrong direction."

            Nick

             

             

          • j.j.salt
            Thanks for the source of the quote. I m sure I knew that it was he who said that, some years ago, but I had long since forgotten. As for the spiritual name
            Message 5 of 10 , Sep 4, 2005
              Thanks for the source of the quote.  I'm sure I knew that it was he who said that, some years ago, but I had long since forgotten. 
               
              As for the spiritual name "Durak," I recently told a correspondent on another discussion list who speaks Russian, "Ya Durak, potomu chto Ya nichevo ne znayu."  If you don't happen to be fluent in Russian, that means, basically, "I am Fool because I know nothing."  The more I have learned, the more I have come to realize how much I don't know.  I took that name, as I did the more obscure j.j.salt, for a variety of reasons, but partly my inspiration was the learned professor of Zen, Daisetz T. Suzuki, who took the name "Daisetz" also voluntarily, and it translates from the Japanese as, "Know nothing." 
              Regards,
              Durak, aka j.j.salt
               
              P.S.  If you are curious about the reasons for my taking on the name, j.j.salt, I may share that some time, but don't feel quite like giving that up yet.  What is interesting and surprising to me is that both "Durak" and "j.j.salt" are, apparently, rather popular choices for screen names and e-mail addresses.  The reason this is true for Durak is readily apparent, to me, but I can't imagine how anyone else came to the name "j.j.salt," since this arose from entirely idiosyncratic reasons. 

              lady_caritas <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
              --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, lady_caritas <no_reply@y...>
              wrote:
              > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "j.j.salt" <jj_salt@y...> wrote:
              >
              > > 
              > > So whenever I have a question in my mind as to whether something
              > is "real" or a "metaphor," the answer is, simply, "Yes." 
              > > 
              > > If you need a literal Sophia, and you don't find one, then you
              need
              > to create one.  As the old saying goes, "If God did not exist we
              > would be obliged to create Him."  (Who did say that, anyway?  I'm
              > blocking who it was.  If anybody knows, I'd appreciate being
              > reminded.)
              > > 
              > > In Unity,
              > > j.j.salt
              >
              >
              > Hi, Durak. 
              >
              > That would be Voltaire:
              > http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=776218
              >
              >
              > Cari

              By the way, where on earth did you pick up your nickname "Durak"? 
              You do *not at all* appear to be the "fool."  ;-)

              Cari


              Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.

            • j.j.salt
              That attitude--that just as the human mind is the creation of God, so too God is the creation of the human mind--is one with which I feel a great deal of
              Message 6 of 10 , Sep 4, 2005
                That attitude--that just as the human mind is the creation of God, so too God is the creation of the human mind--is one with which I feel a great deal of resonance.  I do see, at a basic level, creation as God creating not-God, which then evolves to become God, although it has had God within all the time.  Who creates whom is thus, in my mind, a "chicken and egg" kind of question. 
                 
                Regards,
                j.j.salt

                Mike Leavitt <ac998@...> wrote, in part:
                Well it wasn't him who said it first, but it sounds a lot like the
                attitude of Eliphas Levi Zahid, the French occultist.  More like the
                quote (again while it might have been Voltare, I'm not sure) God
                created man and man returned the favor.  That is more like Levi.

                Regards
                --
                Mike Leavitt  ac998_@_lafn._org  remove -'s




                Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.

              • Mike Leavitt
                Hello j.j.salt ... Well it wasn t him who said it first, but it sounds a lot like the attitude of Eliphas Levi Zahid, the French occultist. More like the
                Message 7 of 10 , Sep 4, 2005
                  Hello j.j.salt

                  On 09/04/05, you wrote:

                  > Dear Anne Marie,
                  >
                  > There is no need to apologize for confusion. Confusion is always the
                  > first stage of learning, because confusion simply means that one is
                  > aware of certain things that seem to be disparate and contradictory.
                  > To get out of confusion, we need to integrate those apparently
                  > contradictory ideas into a new synthesis.
                  >
                  > Of course, it has been my experience that getting out of one
                  > confusion inevitably leads me into another confusion, but that is
                  > the cycle of learning that we sign up for when we take the ride on
                  > this plane.
                  >
                  > One thing that helps me in dealing with the "is this real or is it a
                  > metaphor" problem is what I call the "two-fold realization," which
                  > consists of a two-step logical proposition:
                  >
                  > Because the Absolute realm deals with infinity, and while our
                  > consciousness is tied closely to limited
                  > three-dimensionally-oriented brains we are not capable of
                  > comprehending infinity, everything we say about the Absolute is
                  > therefore a metaphor.
                  >
                  > So whenever I have a question in my mind as to whether something is
                  > "real" or a "metaphor," the answer is, simply, "Yes."
                  >
                  > If you need a literal Sophia, and you don't find one, then you need
                  > to create one. As the old saying goes, "If God did not exist we
                  > would be obliged to create Him." (Who did say that, anyway? I'm
                  > blocking who it was. If anybody knows, I'd appreciate being
                  > reminded.)
                  >
                  > In Unity,
                  > j.j.salt

                  Well it wasn't him who said it first, but it sounds a lot like the
                  attitude of Eliphas Levi Zahid, the French occultist. More like the
                  quote (again while it might have been Voltare, I'm not sure) God
                  created man and man returned the favor. That is more like Levi.

                  Regards
                  --
                  Mike Leavitt ac998_@_lafn._org remove -'s
                • Mike Leavitt
                  Hello lady_caritas ... OK I was right, but you had a more accurate quote, though my version has been uttered before, but the idea was Voltaire. Regards -- Mike
                  Message 8 of 10 , Sep 4, 2005
                    Hello lady_caritas

                    On 09/04/05, you wrote:

                    > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "j.j.salt" <jj_salt@y...> wrote:
                    >
                    >>
                    >> So whenever I have a question in my mind as to whether something
                    > is "real" or a "metaphor," the answer is, simply, "Yes."
                    >>
                    >> If you need a literal Sophia, and you don't find one, then you need
                    > to create one. As the old saying goes, "If God did not exist we
                    > would be obliged to create Him." (Who did say that, anyway? I'm
                    > blocking who it was. If anybody knows, I'd appreciate being
                    > reminded.)
                    >>
                    >> In Unity,
                    >> j.j.salt
                    >
                    >
                    > Hi, Durak.
                    >
                    > That would be Voltaire:
                    > http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=776218
                    >
                    >
                    > Cari

                    OK I was right, but you had a more accurate quote, though my version
                    has been uttered before, but the idea was Voltaire.

                    Regards
                    --
                    Mike Leavitt ac998_@_lafn._org remove -'s
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.