- --- In email@example.com, "janahooks" <janahooks@y...>
> Hello, Lady C.that
> Any comments,
> > reflections, "epiphanies,", etc. after reading this?
> I haven't reread yet. I've been so focused on the Katrina news
> I didn't even realize we were in the strike zone for one ourselves,Well, Gerry seems to want to ride out the storm even though it might
> albeit a dainty one in comparison. I'm officially out of it now,
> but Gerry...
end up right over his house at some point. (Good luck, Ger.)
>Hmmm, would you be able to direct me to the page and passages you're
> About the first read, though, I was having a little trouble keeping
> track of which form of Sophia was doing the talking, and what these
> forms represented. I like how she is described as "forethought"
> and "afterthought" within about 5 sentences of each other--just to
> really keep me working. ;)
referring to, jana? I'm wondering if there is reference to Barbelo
(forethought) and then the emanated Sophia (afterthought, the
> I'm trying to be a little more careful how I define some words
> within their context. What I mean is: when I'm not understanding a
> passage fully I tend to just skip by little phrases that might
> actually help me. A couple of times in "On Destiny: The Second
> Descent", for example, I was reading the word *cast* as if it meant
> to throw, place, or put.
> "I am the fulfillment of all, Meirothea the glory of the mother. I
> cast the voice's speech into the ears of those who know me."
> "I transformed their forms into other forms until the time when
> is given to everyone. The voice came through me. I created breathI
> in my people. And I cast the eternally holy spirit into them, and
> ascended and entered my light."Just to confuse you some more, jana, in _The Gnostic Scriptures_,
> When I read "cast" as closer to what happens when one casts metal
> into a mold, both passages meant more to me. Ya know, I used to
> think of myself as a careful reader...then again, the author might
> have meant to throw, place or put.
Bentley Layton uses the words, "project" and "injected":
"It is I who am the aeon that [...] the completion of the entirety,
namely, Meirothea, the glory of the mother,
And I project a voice [of the] sound into the ears of those who
recognize me. (p. 97)
"... I changed their forms into (temporary) forms until such time as
the entirety should be formed. It was through me that the sound came
to exist. And it is I who put breath into my own. And I injected
the eternal holy spirit into them, and ascended and proceeded into my
light." (p. 97)
>Truly. I've always been intrigued by the mysterious five seals
> I like the next sentence to that last quote:
> "I got on my branch and sat among the children of the holy light."
> Now, there's an illustration for my "Illuminated Gnostic Texts." ;)
mentioned at the end of the work. That possibly could be fodder for
"I hid in them all until I revealed myself among my members, which
are mine, and I taught them about the ineffable ordinances, and about
the brothers and sisters. But they are inexpressible to every
sovereignty and every ruling power except to the children of light,
decreed by the father. These are the glories that are higher than
every glory, that is, the five seals, complete by virtue of
intellect. One who possesses the five seals with these names has
stripped off the garments of ignorance and put on shining light."
- Hello Gerry
On 10/05/05, you wrote:
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "janahooks" <janahooks@y...>
>> When do you think you'll have that ready for us, ye of many jobs?
> How 'bout I start with the "Fragments" of Codex XII . . . and have
> that ready by . . . say . . . early next year? How long do you
> s'pose the compilation would take at that rate of installments? ;-)
>> I've always thought Strong's (?) concordance was aptly named.
>> Yours would be....?
> Well, I really hate the thought of it turning out like the dry
> reading of a mere lexical database, so I kinda had in mind that it
> would be named something like _The *Illustrated* Concordance of
> Gnostic Texts_. I don't think that's been done before. ;-)
> Of course, as we can see by recent discussions here, there are major
> obstacles to be overcome before any such project could be
> undertaken. Would we prefer this tool to aid with the entire Nag
> Hammadi collection, or should it focus only on "Gnostic" texts
> (excluding some works in the NHL and including others from
> elsewhere)? Either way, we should choose one or more anthologies
> with helpful references for the pagination and line numbering of the
> original works, and at least one *accepted* translation for each of
> those texts. Herein lies the first problem: Whose translation of
> each tractate do we deem authoritative enough to use as the bases
> for our concordance? It's rather like the process of canonization,
> and, considering questions over the restoration of many parts of
> these works, deciding on a particular reconstruction for each book
> could be difficult (to say the least).
> Just as we saw with Trimorphic Protennoia, we can find different
> reasons for appreciating various modern translations, but if we were
> to reference multiple versions of that book in a single concordance,
> and readers looked up the word "voice," they would find that this
> word pointed to crucially different terms in the original text
> (again, depending upon exactly how the translators were employing
> that word in English). This could actually be a *good* thing, of
> course, if it allowed people to see the discrepancies from one
> translation to another; even more so if it made clear the context of
> the original.
And copyright law would be a nightmare, because anything more than a
small quote for review purposes is considered misuse without the
author's permission. That's why compiling all translations into one
book would be almost impossible and a concordance might be a problem
Mike Leavitt ac998_@_lafn._org remove -'s