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

Re: Lebanese Gnostics? Crispin's questions

Expand Messages
  • lady_caritas
    ... Widad, when we moderators mention that our focal point is historical Gnosticism, we don t mean to imply that our group prefers fossilized discussion. :-)
    Message 1 of 44 , Apr 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, F8snafs@... wrote:
      >
      > First, my thanks as well to the moderators. I hope I haven't gotten
      >
      > so far off topic with my replies as to make you regret your
      > decision.


      Widad, when we moderators mention that our focal point is historical
      Gnosticism, we don't mean to imply that our group prefers fossilized
      discussion. :-) Tangential dialogue is bound to occur in lots of
      threads; however, we do want to maintain historical Gnosticism as a
      focus, whether we're directly discussing ancient scripture or
      comparing to modern trends. You have kept the focus very nicely.



      > To answer, or at least attempt to answer, the questions behind
      > your questions, Crispin, yes, for all intents and purposes this
      > whole activity has virtually everything in common with an
      authentic
      > Sufic transmission: taking care in dress and behavior as to be
      > indistinguishable from the culture and norms at hand; formulating
      > new material and editing existing materials per the demands of
      > time, place and culture; submission to the teacher; student
      > selection based upon perceived capacities; stressing the
      > importance of attaining states in their proper order; anonymous
      > charitable works within the community.
      >
      > So is this Sufism or Gnosticism or a hybrid? What do you think?
      >


      While Crispin and other members are considering any comparisons of
      this modern group to the ancient Gnostics ~

      Interestingly, exactly four years ago, PMCV brought up the subject of
      Sufism and Gnosticism:
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gnosticism2/message/5723

      I'll defer to PMCV to update any of his thoughts on this subject, of
      course.

      At the time, I came up with some links that included a little
      discussion on the subject of any Sufism – Gnosticism relationship.
      Not all links are still working, but this one was interesting:
      http://answering-islam.org/Books/Zwemer/Heirs/chap10.htm

      Also, some follow-up posts:
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gnosticism2/message/5990
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gnosticism2/message/5995

      Cari
    • Michael Leavitt
      ... Doesn t seem necessary for the Quabalists and the breaking of the vessles. Might make it better though, if he were there. -- M. Leavitt
      Message 44 of 44 , Apr 30, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Steve wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        >> I'm curious what others think. Going back to Plato (as Steve did
        >> with his reference to Theaetetus), we see Plato's demiurge in
        >> Timaeus. How is a relational demiurge of some sort necessary
        >> functionally to a Gnostic system, and is this necessary to carry into
        >> a modern adaptation?
        >>
        >> Cari
        >>
        >>
        > Hi Cari. IMO, it's fascinating to see how, for example, the author of
        > The Apocryphon of John goes back and forth from the Timaeus to Genesis
        > and uses both as a point of departure for his/her own perspective. In
        > Timaeus Plato has the Demiurge using the Form of the Intelligible
        > Living Creature as a template for the Cosmos. As such, Plato seems to
        > be an early advocate for 'Intelligent Design'. For Plato, the world is
        > intelligible, hence modeled upon an intelligible pattern. In the
        > Apocryphon of John the Demiurge also seeks to work from an intelligible
        > pattern, but doesn't fully understand it. Consequently his handiwork is
        > flawed in ways that go beyond the inherent imperfection of a copy in
        > relation to the original. IMO, it might be possible to dispense with a
        > demiurgos in an Neo-Platonic emanationist system wherein the only
        > problem with materiality is the inherent inferiority of copy to
        > original and wherein the successive unfolding of emanations is simply
        > inevitable. However, it seems to me that the problem in the Apocryphon
        > of John goes deeper than this and is conceived as being an actual
        > rupture in the Great Chain of Being. As such, it would be difficult to
        > account for this apart from a Demiurgic figure, or at least a Sophia
        > figure driven by a desire which is contrary to the will of her Consort,
        > that is to say, unbalanced. What is your opinion on this? -Steve W.
        >
        Doesn't seem necessary for the Quabalists and the breaking of the
        vessles. Might make it better though, if he were there.

        --
        M. Leavitt
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.