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

Re: [Gnosticism2] Re: what is an "Anti-Cosmic Dualism?"

Expand Messages
  • j.j.salt
    Warm Greetings, All, I just wish to register my own affirmation of Mike s response, although as he notes it is not exactly original with him. Pure logic, I
    Message 1 of 36 , Sep 4, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Warm Greetings, All,
       
      I just wish to register my own affirmation of Mike's response, although as he notes it is not exactly original with him.  Pure logic, I believe, always ends up in contradiction and paradox because there is an irreducible irrationality inherent in creation. 
       
      Whew!   That's a learned-sounding pronouncement!  Perhaps I should apologize for my "hyperlexia," which I define as "a condition, usually caused by excessive exposure to academic environments, which renders one incapable of expressing things in a simple, straightforward way. 
       
      j.j.salt, aka Durak

      Mike Leavitt <ac998@...> wrote:
      Hello Nick

      On 09/04/05, you wrote:

      >> From Mike Leavitt 
      > I have just an insight. Sophia means wisdom. Wisdom created the
      > demiurge. The demiurge created evil. Therefore the root of evil lies
      > in wisdom. So does the universe. Where does this leave us? Was
      > wisdom unwise, or is there some reason for all of this? Wisdom did
      > this without her consort, so was she only half wise? Still there is
      > an irony here.
      >
      > ...........................
      >
      > The Irony that 'Wisdom' should be responsible for an act of folly I
      > have found noted elsewhere, the reason given why this may have been
      > portrayed that way was qouted as: "That these Hellenistic Gnostics
      > were having a dig at the intellectual philosophers: the Platonists,
      > Aristoleans, Stoics, Epicureans, and the rest. These Philosophers
      > claimed it was possible through reason alone (or 'wisdom';
      > 'Philosophy' means 'love of wisdom') to know the Absolute. The
      > Hellenistics Gnostics however said that such perception can only
      > come through a higher, intuitive, knowing. Here we have the old
      > contrast between the exoteric and the esoteric."
      >
      > Nick

      That is as good an answer as I can think of, and better than I hoped
      to get.

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



      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
      http://mail.yahoo.com

    • Mike Leavitt
      Hello pmcvflag ... Actuallly literal acceptance of authorship and age was quite common. Regards -- Mike Leavitt ac998_@_lafn._org remove - s
      Message 36 of 36 , Oct 2, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello pmcvflag

        On 10/02/05, you wrote:

        > Hey Mike
        >
        >>>> Wasn't the emerald tablet known before the Renisance rediscovery
        >>>> of
        > the Hermetic texts, and cited by earlier Alchemists? If so, that
        > could lead to the idea it was more ancient. The Sephir Yedzirah was
        > out there long before the Zohar, for instance.<<<
        >
        > If I recall, the oldest version of the "Emerald Tablet" is from
        > around the 800s (AD), in Arabic. I think there were translations
        > from the 1200s in medieval Europe, and certainly there have been
        > people who thought these texts were very old. I am not sure exactly
        > where the discovery era presents any genuine reasoning for an older
        > date for the text, but of course even though the notion is not
        > relavant in modern thinking it could have been part of the reasoning
        > for people at the time. I can't say for sure. However, if you think
        > about it from the Renaissance rational, Hermes was a real person
        > from the time of Moses, which means that all hermetic writings that
        > were valid came from this historical person. So even then some texts
        > would not have predated the others.
        >
        > It is true, the Sefer Yetzirah predates the Zohar.... but it is also
        > from a different tradition than the Zohar. So, this could be more
        > like comparing pre-Hermetic ideas of "Hermes" with those of the
        > Corpus Hermetica. Yes, they predate them, but they also tell us a
        > limited amount about them.
        >
        > So, you could have a point there... the mere fact that the texts
        > were more popular and known before the Corpus Hermetica were
        > rediscovered could have lead some thinkers to the idea that they
        > were older. However, I am not sure exactly where this thinking would
        > have come from... all things considered.
        >
        > PMCV

        Actuallly literal acceptance of authorship and age was quite common.

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