Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
Skip to search.
 

Re: A Question for the gruop...

Expand Messages
  • pmcvflag
    Hey Darkchylde ... adequately enough to show that many have differing branches of the same tree.
    Message 1 of 19 , Nov 9, 2006
      Hey Darkchylde

      >>>I think the definition of gnosis and gnostic have been expessed
      adequately enough to show that many have differing branches of the
      same tree.<<<

      Yes, I think most of us would agree that "Gnosticism" is a branch on
      the tree of "Esotericism", and as such has things in common with other
      forms of mystical or esoteric thought. Also, as a branch on the trees
      of "Hellenism" and "Middle Platonism" we see similarities with other
      groups in those categories as well.

      >>>But my question is this. What exactly is it we are to 'know?'<<<

      Of course that question would depend on who's notion of "gnosis". For
      instance, many New Age groups seem to connect the term "gnosis" to
      attaining some kind of psychic powers... so what it is they are
      to "know" is how to attain those powers.

      In my perspective, when we bring that focus down to the historical
      Gnostics the subject gains a more specific meaning. According to
      Gnostic texts Gnosis is a multifold and comprehensive understanding
      that includes very specific cosmological knowledge, personal
      knowledge, and hermeneutic understanding. More specifically, what we
      must know is who we are within a wider spiritual cosmology, and how we
      as individuals relate to that cosmology (where we are from, and where
      we can return).

      >>>Is it the dusty ramblings in the many and sometimes contridictory
      texts? Is it mythologies and analogies? Or is there something more?
      Why would there be all this learning if we are still trapped in our
      perspectives and do not realize the greater reality that exists beyond
      what we see, hear, taste, smell and feel?<<<

      In traditional "dusty" Gnostic thinking, it is the act of
      understanding itself that frees one from the confines of pure material
      reactonary perspective. This is very much like the destinction between
      a priori knowing vs a posteriori knowing in that it is a knowing that
      goes beyond direct perception. The understaning in question must
      contain both the experience based form of knowledge AND the
      intellectual breakthrough in order to truly BE this
      salvational "Gnosis".

      I can put that more simply. Imagine you and I were part of a
      traditional Gnostic sect, and you were my teacher. Now since I am a
      person who is not familiar with the "mystery" you are going to teach
      me, you would have to start by helping me understand HOW to
      contextualize things correctly for the system. You might give me some
      ritual activities, or meditations, meant to widen my awareness and
      evoke spiritual experiences. At the same time you would likely work on
      my ability to conceptualize things I had not previously understood.
      Eventually I will have to come to understand a cosmology that includes
      several very complicated notions of infinity, and what they have to do
      with me. I will have to gain that understanding by connecting the two
      methods you are using to teach me.

      As Plato said...

      "This knowledge is not something that can be learned only through
      words like other sciences; but rather after long-continued intercourse
      between teacher and pupil, in joint pursuit of the subject, suddenly,
      like light flashing forth when a fire is kindled, it is born in the
      soul and straightway nourishes itself."

      >>>What marks a moment of 'gnosis', is it to allow our perspectives
      (or mind) to transend reality as we know it? Is this the 'goal'
      or 'holy grail' that we are to seek?<<<

      Although Gnosis has moments of breakthrough presenting it (the light
      flashing forth), epiphanies, we should be careful not to confuse it
      with the moment of mystical experience. Gnosis, in the traditional
      meaning, isn't an event or a moment, it is the attainment of a process
      that gives an entire perspective.

      In other words, once you have taught me what I am supposed to know
      then if I have not had spiritual experience I don't have "Gnosis". At
      the same time, if I don't have understanding of the meaning of those
      dusty texts I ALSO don't have Gnosis. One is just a happening, while
      the other is just a context. A true full comprehension (gnosis) must
      have both the event and the context.

      Knowing how to build the bike is not Gnosis. Having the ability to
      ride the bike is not Gnosis either. Gnosis is a complete understanding
      of the bike... how to make it, how to ride it, and finally where that
      bike will take you.

      Anyone here disagree or have thoughts?

      PMCV
    • Scott Hutton
      What pray is a gruop ?All this verbiage about gnosticisms...pourquoi tous ces mots?  (English, obviously, ain t cuttin it).It s knowing,  a sudden
      Message 2 of 19 , Nov 9, 2006

        What pray is a "gruop"?

        All this verbiage about gnosticisms...pourquoi tous ces mots?� (English, obviously, ain't cuttin' it).

        It's knowing,� a sudden knowning.� As in Bam!� Flash!

        At the risk of being dismissed from this list, I say:� Pay attention!

        Stop talking about.

        Listen.

        Stop postponing your enlightenment.� Stop putting off your sudden knowing.

        The postponement merely drags out frustration.� And trust an old man:� postponement has nothing to do with gnosticism.

        Listen!

        Listen!� Not to me, but to That!

        Scott




        --- On Thu 11/09, pmcvflag < no_reply@yahoogroups.com > wrote:
        From: pmcvflag [mailto: no_reply@yahoogroups.com]
        To: gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 01:19:49 -0000
        Subject: [Gnosticism2] Re: A Question for the gruop...














        Hey Darkchylde

        >>>I think the definition of gnosis and gnostic have been expessed
        adequately enough to show that many have differing branches of the
        same tree.<<<

        Yes, I think most of us would agree that "Gnosticism" is a branch on
        the tree of "Esotericism" , and as such has things in common with other
        forms of mystical or esoteric thought. Also, as a branch on the trees
        of "Hellenism" and "Middle Platonism" we see similarities with other
        groups in those categories as well.

        >>>But my question is this. What exactly is it we are to 'know?'<<<

        Of course that question would depend on who's notion of "gnosis". For
        instance, many New Age groups seem to connect the term "gnosis" to
        attaining some kind of psychic powers... so what it is they are
        to "know" is how to attain those powers.

        In my perspective, when we bring that focus down to the historical
        Gnostics the subject gains a more specific meaning. According to
        Gnostic texts Gnosis is a multifold and comprehensive understanding
        that includes very specific cosmological knowledge, personal
        knowledge, and hermeneutic understanding. More specifically, what we
        must know is who we are within a wider spiritual cosmology, and how we
        as individuals relate to that cosmology (where we are from, and where
        we can return).

        >>>Is it the dusty ramblings in the many and sometimes contridictory
        texts? Is it mythologies and analogies? Or is there something more?
        Why would there be all this learning if we are still trapped in our
        perspectives and do not realize the greater reality that exists beyond
        what we see, hear, taste, smell and feel?<<<

        In traditional "dusty" Gnostic thinking, it is the act of
        understanding itself that frees one from the confines of pure material
        reactonary perspective. This is very much like the destinction between
        a priori knowing vs a posteriori knowing in that it is a knowing that
        goes beyond direct perception. The understaning in question must
        contain both the experience based form of knowledge AND the
        intellectual breakthrough in order to truly BE this
        salvational "Gnosis".

        I can put that more simply. Imagine you and I were part of a
        traditional Gnostic sect, and you were my teacher. Now since I am a
        person who is not familiar with the "mystery" you are going to teach
        me, you would have to start by helping me understand HOW to
        contextualize things correctly for the system. You might give me some
        ritual activities, or meditations, meant to widen my awareness and
        evoke spiritual experiences. At the same time you would likely work on
        my ability to conceptualize things I had not previously understood.
        Eventually I will have to come to understand a cosmology that includes
        several very complicated notions of infinity, and what they have to do
        with me. I will have to gain that understanding by connecting the two
        methods you are using to teach me.

        As Plato said...

        "This knowledge is not something that can be learned only through
        words like other sciences; but rather after long-continued intercourse
        between teacher and pupil, in joint pursuit of the subject, suddenly,
        like light flashing forth when a fire is kindled, it is born in the
        soul and straightway nourishes itself."

        >>>What marks a moment of 'gnosis', is it to allow our perspectives
        (or mind) to transend reality as we know it? Is this the 'goal'
        or 'holy grail' that we are to seek?<<<

        Although Gnosis has moments of breakthrough presenting it (the light
        flashing forth), epiphanies, we should be careful not to confuse it
        with the moment of mystical experience. Gnosis, in the traditional
        meaning, isn't an event or a moment, it is the attainment of a process
        that gives an entire perspective.

        In other words, once you have taught me what I am supposed to know
        then if I have not had spiritual experience I don't have "Gnosis". At
        the same time, if I don't have understanding of the meaning of those
        dusty texts I ALSO don't have Gnosis. One is just a happening, while
        the other is just a context. A true full comprehension (gnosis) must
        have both the event and the context.

        Knowing how to build the bike is not Gnosis. Having the ability to
        ride the bike is not Gnosis either. Gnosis is a complete understanding
        of the bike... how to make it, how to ride it, and finally where that
        bike will take you.

        Anyone here disagree or have thoughts?

        PMCV










        No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
        Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com

      • imdarkchylde
        Blessings!! Now this was one thing I could sink my teeth in, so to speak. Yum!LOL Just want to clarify one thing. (I know, *groan*) A similar analogy would be
        Message 3 of 19 , Nov 9, 2006
          Blessings!!
          Now this was one thing I could sink my teeth in, so to speak. Yum!LOL
          Just want to clarify one thing. (I know, *groan*)
          A similar analogy would be describing red to a person born blind. I
          can describe the color and its effect and everything most
          loquaciously (love that word, have so little chance to use it in
          conversation) but how can a blind person know what red is until
          he/she sees it for themselves? To me any discussion of 'gnosis'
          would be similar. I believe you are correct in the fact it is not
          one aspect to conquer in order to achieve gnosis, but many. A
          teacher can show the student the door but the student must pass thru
          for themselves. I do believe that someone that has aquired gnosis,
          if they have truly had it, it will change them irrevocably. It did
          me. But it was a combination of being exposed to new ideas, having a
          mind open to that experience, and accepting the experience when it
          came, and it changed my life. It was a combination of things, like
          you said about the bike. I learned how a bike is made, how it works,
          and then I learned to ride. Learning to ride alone would not have
          made the experience complete, learning to make the bike and how it
          works would not have make the experience complete. But the
          combination of the elements would make me a biker. Snicker. I was
          blind, and had red dscribed to me. I hungered for more than a
          description, I wanted to know, to experience red. Now I can see.
          I think many are frustrated as they get the descriptions, they get
          the idea- they get it here (touch the corner of the crainum) but they
          don't feel it here (touch the heart.) It has to be the entire
          experience. Mind, understanding; body, feeling; spirit,
          transformation. Am I in the ballpark at least? Or am I just parking
          cars?LOL
          Hope you are Blessed!
          Whirled and inner peas
          DarkChylde


          Gnothi Seauton

          **Love thy enemies. It messes with their heads!**



          --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, pmcvflag <no_reply@...> wrote:
          >
          > Hey Darkchylde
          >
          > >>>I think the definition of gnosis and gnostic have been expessed
          > adequately enough to show that many have differing branches of the
          > same tree.<<<
          >
          > Yes, I think most of us would agree that "Gnosticism" is a branch
          on
          > the tree of "Esotericism", and as such has things in common with
          other
          > forms of mystical or esoteric thought. Also, as a branch on the
          trees
          > of "Hellenism" and "Middle Platonism" we see similarities with
          other
          > groups in those categories as well.
          >
          > >>>But my question is this. What exactly is it we are to 'know?'<<<
          >
          > Of course that question would depend on who's notion of "gnosis".
          For
          > instance, many New Age groups seem to connect the term "gnosis" to
          > attaining some kind of psychic powers... so what it is they are
          > to "know" is how to attain those powers.
          >
          > In my perspective, when we bring that focus down to the historical
          > Gnostics the subject gains a more specific meaning. According to
          > Gnostic texts Gnosis is a multifold and comprehensive understanding
          > that includes very specific cosmological knowledge, personal
          > knowledge, and hermeneutic understanding. More specifically, what
          we
          > must know is who we are within a wider spiritual cosmology, and how
          we
          > as individuals relate to that cosmology (where we are from, and
          where
          > we can return).
          >
          > >>>Is it the dusty ramblings in the many and sometimes
          contridictory
          > texts? Is it mythologies and analogies? Or is there something more?
          > Why would there be all this learning if we are still trapped in our
          > perspectives and do not realize the greater reality that exists
          beyond
          > what we see, hear, taste, smell and feel?<<<
          >
          > In traditional "dusty" Gnostic thinking, it is the act of
          > understanding itself that frees one from the confines of pure
          material
          > reactonary perspective. This is very much like the destinction
          between
          > a priori knowing vs a posteriori knowing in that it is a knowing
          that
          > goes beyond direct perception. The understaning in question must
          > contain both the experience based form of knowledge AND the
          > intellectual breakthrough in order to truly BE this
          > salvational "Gnosis".
          >
          > I can put that more simply. Imagine you and I were part of a
          > traditional Gnostic sect, and you were my teacher. Now since I am a
          > person who is not familiar with the "mystery" you are going to
          teach
          > me, you would have to start by helping me understand HOW to
          > contextualize things correctly for the system. You might give me
          some
          > ritual activities, or meditations, meant to widen my awareness and
          > evoke spiritual experiences. At the same time you would likely work
          on
          > my ability to conceptualize things I had not previously understood.
          > Eventually I will have to come to understand a cosmology that
          includes
          > several very complicated notions of infinity, and what they have to
          do
          > with me. I will have to gain that understanding by connecting the
          two
          > methods you are using to teach me.
          >
          > As Plato said...
          >
          > "This knowledge is not something that can be learned only through
          > words like other sciences; but rather after long-continued
          intercourse
          > between teacher and pupil, in joint pursuit of the subject,
          suddenly,
          > like light flashing forth when a fire is kindled, it is born in the
          > soul and straightway nourishes itself."
          >
          > >>>What marks a moment of 'gnosis', is it to allow our perspectives
          > (or mind) to transend reality as we know it? Is this the 'goal'
          > or 'holy grail' that we are to seek?<<<
          >
          > Although Gnosis has moments of breakthrough presenting it (the
          light
          > flashing forth), epiphanies, we should be careful not to confuse it
          > with the moment of mystical experience. Gnosis, in the traditional
          > meaning, isn't an event or a moment, it is the attainment of a
          process
          > that gives an entire perspective.
          >
          > In other words, once you have taught me what I am supposed to know
          > then if I have not had spiritual experience I don't have "Gnosis".
          At
          > the same time, if I don't have understanding of the meaning of
          those
          > dusty texts I ALSO don't have Gnosis. One is just a happening,
          while
          > the other is just a context. A true full comprehension (gnosis)
          must
          > have both the event and the context.
          >
          > Knowing how to build the bike is not Gnosis. Having the ability to
          > ride the bike is not Gnosis either. Gnosis is a complete
          understanding
          > of the bike... how to make it, how to ride it, and finally where
          that
          > bike will take you.
          >
          > Anyone here disagree or have thoughts?
          >
          > PMCV
          >
        • pmcvflag
          Hey Scott You state.... ... *lol* Well, a gruop appears to be a typo for group ... as in this forum (the gathering of people posting on the message board
          Message 4 of 19 , Nov 9, 2006
            Hey Scott

            You state....

            >>>What pray is a "gruop"?<<<

            *lol* Well, a "gruop" appears to be a typo for "group"... as in this
            forum (the gathering of people posting on the message board that you
            are now presenting your own ideas on)

            >>>Stop postponing your enlightenment. Stop putting off your sudden
            knowing.<<<

            In order to give such advice you would have to assume that the
            person you are talking to has indeed put it off or not attained it.
            That would be rather presumptuous.

            In any event, "Gnosis" in the traditional sense isn't the same thing
            as "enlightenment" in the modern sense. What we are talking about
            isn't necessarily identical. With that in mind, can you clarify for
            us whether you feel your notion of "Gnosis" is the same as that
            presented in the traditional Gnostic texts? It could be important
            considering the fact that you are talking to a group that uses a
            very specific lingo.

            >>>Stop talking about.<<<

            This is a forum. That means by definition we are here to talk. You,
            in fact, just talked about it as well.

            PMCV
          • pmcvflag
            Hey Darkchylde ... LOL Just want to clarify one thing. (I know, *groan*)
            Message 5 of 19 , Nov 9, 2006
              Hey Darkchylde

              >>>Now this was one thing I could sink my teeth in, so to speak. Yum!
              LOL Just want to clarify one thing. (I know, *groan*)<<<

              Glad I was understandable *lol*. I am always unsure if I am actually
              making sense. Anyway, no groans here... it is part of what we are
              here to talk about, after all.

              >>>A similar analogy would be describing red to a person born blind.
              I can describe the color and its effect and everything most
              loquaciously (love that word, have so little chance to use it in
              conversation) but how can a blind person know what red is until
              he/she sees it for themselves? To me any discussion of 'gnosis'
              would be similar.<<<

              I think in one sense your analogy is very apropos. I wonder, though,
              if it could confuse some people into thinking "Gnosis" is an
              experience the way seeing a color is. Still, I can't think of a
              better example off the top of my head. I think perhaps just to
              clarify we could simply add that the person who sees the red without
              thinking about it has no more "Gnosis" of red than the person who
              can describe it without seeing it. Both have only one side of the
              understanding.

              I think many people would rhetorically ask "well, isn't it the
              seeing of the red that is the important part, the final goal?" I
              think that when looking at the Gnostic perspective the answer to
              that question is, no. A computer scanner can detect red vs black
              without any cognitive effect. An animal can experience red without
              comprehending that the experience has some meaning beyond the simple
              fact of being red (why is the stop sign red? does the redness of
              some flowers have a function? why should Roxanne not "put on the red
              light"? how did "red" come to be seperate from "white" in the first
              place? Is there value to viewing colors beyond greyscale?)

              >>>I believe you are correct in the fact it is not one aspect to
              conquer in order to achieve gnosis, but many. A teacher can show the
              student the door but the student must pass thru for themselves. I do
              believe that someone that has aquired gnosis, if they have truly had
              it, it will change them irrevocably.<<<

              I think nobody would quibble with you on that point.

              >>>It did me. But it was a combination of being exposed to new
              ideas, having a mind open to that experience, and accepting the
              experience when it came, and it changed my life. It was a
              combination of things, like you said about the bike. I learned how a
              bike is made, how it works, and then I learned to ride. Learning to
              ride alone would not have made the experience complete, learning to
              make the bike and how it works would not have make the experience
              complete. But the combination of the elements would make me a biker.
              Snicker. I was blind, and had red dscribed to me. I hungered for
              more than a description, I wanted to know, to experience red. Now I
              can see.<<<

              Some would say that perhaps another step in understanding red would
              be to form a common conceptualization with others. As Isidore of
              Seville said "Who knoweth not the names, knoweth not the subject".

              >>>I think many are frustrated as they get the descriptions, they
              get the idea- they get it here (touch the corner of the crainum) but
              they don't feel it here (touch the heart.) It has to be the entire
              experience. Mind, understanding; body, feeling; spirit,
              transformation. Am I in the ballpark at least? Or am I just parking
              cars?LOL<<<

              Sounds right to me. As you state, it goes both ways. Just as people
              sometimes get it in the head, but not the heart... there are many
              who get it in the heart but don't quite get it in the head yet.
              Either direction fails to be Gnosis.

              In fact, that does kind of help give perspective to the function of
              this forum. There are some 300 groups in the "Gnosticism" section of
              Yahoo Groups that deal with the heart side so we figured perhaps we
              could fill the gap on the head side *lol*. Well, just joking...
              partly.

              Seriously though, to be more technical; if one doesn't know about
              the Demiurge, the fine points of the difference between the
              apophatic infinity vs the kind of infinity presented by the "second
              Father", the meaning of the fall of Sophia, the function of
              intellect as it is presented, say, in Allogenes... then one has not
              attained "Gnosis", by definition of the word.

              What I am saying then, and I think you are as well, is that in
              traditional Gnostic thinking the experience and the context simply
              cannot be removed from each other and still constitute "Gnosis".
              That is why we cannot be so quick to discard or discount those moldy
              old texts. ;)

              PMCV
            • imdarkchylde
              Blessings, Scott!! Yeah, my fingers get dyslexic from time to time, and I don t always proofread. My spelling ain t so hot either!LOL I don t remember reading
              Message 6 of 19 , Nov 10, 2006
                Blessings, Scott!!
                Yeah, my fingers get dyslexic from time to time, and I don't always
                proofread. My spelling ain't so hot either!LOL
                I don't remember reading anything that you have posted in English, so
                why do you think English isn't cutting it? Perhaps Hebrew would? Or
                Greek? I know, Martian!LOL
                I agree with you that a moment of Gnosis is Bam. But without prior
                understanding of what is happening, which would come from an
                understanding and study from the gnostic teachers, one wouldn't
                really understand what is happening to them in the first place.
                I really don't think I would have had my moment of Gnosis had I not
                started studying Gnosticism to begin with. When I was a little girl
                and growing up in the original Southern Bible-thumper family, a Bam
                moment would have done me little good, or I would have misinterpreted
                it as coming from what I thought was God but it was really only the
                demiuge. Same thing for when I was a witch. I had 'psychic'
                experiences (fire scrying and the like) but that is not what I am
                talking about when I am talking about a moment of gnosis. I believe
                when it hits you, it is like a strike of lightning. But just as
                certain environmental conditions must be met for lightning to appear,
                then conditions for gnosis must come the same way. I personally feel
                it is a mixture of having an open mind (and that isn't as easy as it
                sounds, I know MANY people who THINK their mind is open, but when you
                speak or discuss something with them they are sooo busy being 'right'
                they aren't open), study and meditation/contemplation on those things
                learned.
                That is how it happened with me. And believe me, I AM LISTENING.
                Always. Waiting for another lightning strike, or the little moments
                I have epiphanies, which I consider to be a vehicle to gnosis, but
                not the only vehicle.
                Are YOU listening?
                BTW, my knowledge of French is limited to some profanity, so what,
                pray tell, is pourquoi tous ces mots?
                Whirled and inner peas
                DarkChylde

                Gnothi Seauton
                **Love thy enemies. It messes with their head!*

                --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Hutton"<hmshutton@...>
                wrote:
                >
                >
                > What pray is a "gruop"?All this verbiage about
                gnosticisms...pourquoi tous ces mots?  (English, obviously, ain't
                cuttin' it).It's knowing,  a sudden knowning.  As in Bam!  Flash!At
                the risk of being dismissed from this list, I say:  Pay attention!
                Stop talking about.Listen.Stop postponing your enlightenment.  Stop
                putting off your sudden knowing.The postponement merely drags out
                frustration.  And trust an old man:  postponement has nothing to do
                with gnosticism.Listen!Listen!  Not to me, but to That!Scott --- On
                Thu 11/09, pmcvflag < no_reply@yahoogroups.com > wrote:From:
                pmcvflag [mailto: no_reply@yahoogroups.com]To: gnosticism2@...: Fri,
                10 Nov 2006 01:19:49 -0000Subject: [Gnosticism2] Re: A Question for
                the gruop... Hey Darkchylde>>>I think the
                definition of gnosis and gnostic have been expessedadequately enough
                to show that many have differing branches of thesame
                tree.<<<Yes, I think most of us would agree
                > that "Gnosticism" is a branch on the tree of
                "Esotericism", and as such has things in common with other
                forms of mystical or esoteric thought. Also, as a branch on the trees
                of "Hellenism" and "Middle Platonism" we see
                similarities with other groups in those categories as
                well.>>>But my question is this. What exactly is it we are
                to 'know?'<<<Of course that question would depend on who's
                notion of "gnosis". For instance, many New Age groups seem
                to connect the term "gnosis" to attaining some kind of
                psychic powers... so what it is they are to "know" is how
                to attain those powers.In my perspective, when we bring that focus
                down to the historical Gnostics the subject gains a more specific
                meaning. According to Gnostic texts Gnosis is a multifold and
                comprehensive understanding that includes very specific cosmological
                knowledge, personal knowledge, and hermeneutic understanding. More
                > specifically, what we must know is who we are within a wider
                spiritual cosmology, and how we as individuals relate to that
                cosmology (where we are from, and where we can return).
                >>>Is it the dusty ramblings in the many and sometimes
                contridictory texts? Is it mythologies and analogies? Or is there
                something more? Why would there be all this learning if we are still
                trapped in our perspectives and do not realize the greater reality
                that exists beyond what we see, hear, taste, smell and feel?
                <<<In traditional "dusty" Gnostic thinking, it is
                the act of understanding itself that frees one from the confines of
                pure material reactonary perspective. This is very much like the
                destinction between a priori knowing vs a posteriori knowing in that
                it is a knowing that goes beyond direct perception. The understaning
                in question must contain both the experience based form of knowledge
                AND the intellectual breakthrough in order to truly BE this
                salvational
                > "Gnosis".I can put that more simply. Imagine you and I
                were part of a traditional Gnostic sect, and you were my teacher. Now
                since I am a person who is not familiar with the "mystery"
                you are going to teach me, you would have to start by helping me
                understand HOW to contextualize things correctly for the system. You
                might give me some ritual activities, or meditations, meant to widen
                my awareness and evoke spiritual experiences. At the same time you
                would likely work on my ability to conceptualize things I had not
                previously understood. Eventually I will have to come to understand a
                cosmology that includes several very complicated notions of infinity,
                and what they have to do with me. I will have to gain that
                understanding by connecting the two methods you are using to teach
                me.As Plato said..."This knowledge is not something that can be
                learned only through words like other sciences; but rather after long-
                continued intercourse between teacher and
                > pupil, in joint pursuit of the subject, suddenly, like light
                flashing forth when a fire is kindled, it is born in the soul and
                straightway nourishes itself.">>>What marks a moment
                of 'gnosis', is it to allow our perspectives (or mind) to transend
                reality as we know it? Is this the 'goal' or 'holy grail' that we are
                to seek?<<<Although Gnosis has moments of breakthrough
                presenting it (the light flashing forth), epiphanies, we should be
                careful not to confuse it with the moment of mystical experience.
                Gnosis, in the traditional meaning, isn't an event or a moment, it is
                the attainment of a process that gives an entire perspective.In other
                words, once you have taught me what I am supposed to know then if I
                have not had spiritual experience I don't have "Gnosis". At
                the same time, if I don't have understanding of the meaning of those
                dusty texts I ALSO don't have Gnosis. One is just a happening, while
                the other is just a context. A true full
                > comprehension (gnosis) must have both the event and the
                context.Knowing how to build the bike is not Gnosis. Having the
                ability to ride the bike is not Gnosis either. Gnosis is a complete
                understanding of the bike... how to make it, how to ride it, and
                finally where that bike will take you.Anyone here disagree or have
                thoughts?PMCV
                >
                > _______________________________________________
                > No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
                > Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com
                >
              • pmcvflag
                Hey Darkchylde ... Scott is not listening. Guess he didn t like us *lol*. Que Seurat, Seurat. PMCV
                Message 7 of 19 , Nov 10, 2006
                  Hey Darkchylde

                  >>>Blessings, Scott!! .....Are YOU listening?<<<<

                  Scott is not listening. Guess he didn't like us *lol*. Que Seurat,
                  Seurat.

                  PMCV
                • Michael Leavitt
                  ... Neither, but what role does meditation have in all this?
                  Message 8 of 19 , Nov 10, 2006
                    pmcvflag wrote:
                    > Hey Darkchylde
                    >
                    >
                    >>>> I think the definition of gnosis and gnostic have been expessed
                    >>>>
                    > adequately enough to show that many have differing branches of the
                    > same tree.<<<
                    >
                    > Yes, I think most of us would agree that "Gnosticism" is a branch on
                    > the tree of "Esotericism", and as such has things in common with other
                    > forms of mystical or esoteric thought. Also, as a branch on the trees
                    > of "Hellenism" and "Middle Platonism" we see similarities with other
                    > groups in those categories as well.
                    >
                    >
                    >>>> But my question is this. What exactly is it we are to 'know?'<<<
                    >>>>
                    >
                    > Of course that question would depend on who's notion of "gnosis". For
                    > instance, many New Age groups seem to connect the term "gnosis" to
                    > attaining some kind of psychic powers... so what it is they are
                    > to "know" is how to attain those powers.
                    >
                    > In my perspective, when we bring that focus down to the historical
                    > Gnostics the subject gains a more specific meaning. According to
                    > Gnostic texts Gnosis is a multifold and comprehensive understanding
                    > that includes very specific cosmological knowledge, personal
                    > knowledge, and hermeneutic understanding. More specifically, what we
                    > must know is who we are within a wider spiritual cosmology, and how we
                    > as individuals relate to that cosmology (where we are from, and where
                    > we can return).
                    >
                    >
                    >>>> Is it the dusty ramblings in the many and sometimes contridictory
                    >>>>
                    > texts? Is it mythologies and analogies? Or is there something more?
                    > Why would there be all this learning if we are still trapped in our
                    > perspectives and do not realize the greater reality that exists beyond
                    > what we see, hear, taste, smell and feel?<<<
                    >
                    > In traditional "dusty" Gnostic thinking, it is the act of
                    > understanding itself that frees one from the confines of pure material
                    > reactonary perspective. This is very much like the destinction between
                    > a priori knowing vs a posteriori knowing in that it is a knowing that
                    > goes beyond direct perception. The understaning in question must
                    > contain both the experience based form of knowledge AND the
                    > intellectual breakthrough in order to truly BE this
                    > salvational "Gnosis".
                    >
                    > I can put that more simply. Imagine you and I were part of a
                    > traditional Gnostic sect, and you were my teacher. Now since I am a
                    > person who is not familiar with the "mystery" you are going to teach
                    > me, you would have to start by helping me understand HOW to
                    > contextualize things correctly for the system. You might give me some
                    > ritual activities, or meditations, meant to widen my awareness and
                    > evoke spiritual experiences. At the same time you would likely work on
                    > my ability to conceptualize things I had not previously understood.
                    > Eventually I will have to come to understand a cosmology that includes
                    > several very complicated notions of infinity, and what they have to do
                    > with me. I will have to gain that understanding by connecting the two
                    > methods you are using to teach me.
                    >
                    > As Plato said...
                    >
                    > "This knowledge is not something that can be learned only through
                    > words like other sciences; but rather after long-continued intercourse
                    > between teacher and pupil, in joint pursuit of the subject, suddenly,
                    > like light flashing forth when a fire is kindled, it is born in the
                    > soul and straightway nourishes itself."
                    >
                    >
                    >>>> What marks a moment of 'gnosis', is it to allow our perspectives
                    >>>>
                    > (or mind) to transend reality as we know it? Is this the 'goal'
                    > or 'holy grail' that we are to seek?<<<
                    >
                    > Although Gnosis has moments of breakthrough presenting it (the light
                    > flashing forth), epiphanies, we should be careful not to confuse it
                    > with the moment of mystical experience. Gnosis, in the traditional
                    > meaning, isn't an event or a moment, it is the attainment of a process
                    > that gives an entire perspective.
                    >
                    > In other words, once you have taught me what I am supposed to know
                    > then if I have not had spiritual experience I don't have "Gnosis". At
                    > the same time, if I don't have understanding of the meaning of those
                    > dusty texts I ALSO don't have Gnosis. One is just a happening, while
                    > the other is just a context. A true full comprehension (gnosis) must
                    > have both the event and the context.
                    >
                    > Knowing how to build the bike is not Gnosis. Having the ability to
                    > ride the bike is not Gnosis either. Gnosis is a complete understanding
                    > of the bike... how to make it, how to ride it, and finally where that
                    > bike will take you.
                    >
                    > Anyone here disagree or have thoughts?
                    >
                    > PMCV
                    >
                    >
                    Neither, but what role does meditation have in all this?
                    >
                    >
                  • imdarkchylde
                    Sure hope I didn t offend. Sagitarrians are not known for tact and diplomacy. (Been told all us centaurs must be born in a barn.LOL) I m going to have to
                    Message 9 of 19 , Nov 10, 2006
                      Sure hope I didn't offend. Sagitarrians are not known for tact and
                      diplomacy. (Been told all us centaurs must be born in a barn.LOL)
                      I'm going to have to brush up on my French, too at this rate!LOL
                      Whirled and inner peas
                      DarkChylde


                      Gnothi Seauton

                      **Love thy enemies. It messes with their heads!**

                      --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, pmcvflag <no_reply@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Hey Darkchylde
                      >
                      > >>>Blessings, Scott!! .....Are YOU listening?<<<<
                      >
                      > Scott is not listening. Guess he didn't like us *lol*. Que Seurat,
                      > Seurat.
                      >
                      > PMCV
                      >
                    • imdarkchylde
                      Most excellent question! I kinda brushed on contemplation with understanding and study, but I think if would be helpful if not necessary to have a foundation
                      Message 10 of 19 , Nov 10, 2006
                        Most excellent question!
                        I kinda brushed on contemplation with understanding and study, but I
                        think if would be helpful if not necessary to have a foundation in
                        some sort of gnostic thought, freeing the perspective to experience
                        it as a focused event.
                        I know this forum operates in a historical venure, but the only way
                        to express a view on meditation and gnosis is to relate some personal
                        experiences. Hope I don't offend!! LOL
                        I used to mediate when I was into Keltic Shamanism and when I was
                        fire-scrying I had and OBE (out of body experience) but I panicked
                        and was instantly 'back'. It was there, it was real, and it came by
                        meditaion and study but it wasn't gnosis. I didn't experience the
                        whole floating or seeing my body thing, but my consciousness was
                        instantly transported to a place of complete and utter blackness - no
                        stars or anything. I was terrified (I have since heard this was
                        described as the 'terror threshold' and I was more of a chicken than
                        I thought LOL) and have hesitated to open myself up to that again, as
                        I 'returned' in a sweat and panting. I had experienced another
                        realitiy, but without focus or direction or anything it only showed
                        me there is realities other than the physical one now. I now
                        understand I had discovered the tzimtzum, the original constriction
                        of the Light of the Unmainfest. "When I formed the light I created
                        the Darkness" it says in Isaiah.
                        My momnet I believe I had of gnosis, which had a transforming effect
                        on my life (which was in a serious downward spiral at the time) was
                        just a time sitting with a cat on my lap and contemplating what was
                        it was that distinquished life inside matter, the Epinoia (although I
                        didn't actually learn that term till later, I was barely thru the
                        Gospel of Thomas and the Apoch. of John then)I was trying to see the
                        iife in the crude matter and for just a moment, I saw something, hard
                        to describe, but like a light was in the eyes of the cat, and this
                        same light seemed to eminate from the plants in the window, and
                        seemed to even float by in the very air in thin streams, and at that
                        moment I felt an awareness, for lack of a better word, of myself, the
                        cat, the recliner, the room, the outside ground, it went on and on
                        and I was truly connected to everything and everone and I was aware
                        of molecules and stars all at the some moment. Everything seemed an
                        amazing dance of precision and chaos, of dark and light all intwined,
                        and of a supernal light which dimmed the ilght of stars and sun and
                        which existed in ever radiating streams and I craved this light, I
                        think, before I was back in the chair with a cat giving me a weird
                        look. That I feel went past psychic, and I truly changed and found
                        the path I now have which brings me this light in small doses.
                        Sometimes I think I would rather try to recreate that experience
                        rather than OBEs which terrified me.
                        Meditation was key in both but one was frightening and didn't change
                        my life, as it was unfocused and I was still 'in the dark', but the
                        other was connectied to something wonderful and full of light. I
                        experienced it and it was awakening. I know it, it isn't a belief,
                        faith or acid flashback (LOL) but a reality just as real or more than
                        the one I experience as I type on this keyboard. Both had left me
                        with a feeling of being really awake for the first time, like water
                        splashed in your face when your drowsing.
                        So shove me in the shallow water before I get too deep!LOL
                        Be Blessed!!
                        Whirled and inner peas
                        DarkChylde



                        Gnothi Seauton

                        **Love thy enemies. It messes with their heads!**


                        --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, Michael Leavitt <ac998@...> wrote:
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > pmcvflag wrote:
                        > > Hey Darkchylde
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >>>> I think the definition of gnosis and gnostic have been expessed
                        > >>>>
                        > > adequately enough to show that many have differing branches of the
                        > > same tree.<<<
                        > >
                        > > Yes, I think most of us would agree that "Gnosticism" is a branch
                        on
                        > > the tree of "Esotericism", and as such has things in common with
                        other
                        > > forms of mystical or esoteric thought. Also, as a branch on the
                        trees
                        > > of "Hellenism" and "Middle Platonism" we see similarities with
                        other
                        > > groups in those categories as well.
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >>>> But my question is this. What exactly is it we are
                        to 'know?'<<<
                        > >>>>
                        > >
                        > > Of course that question would depend on who's notion of "gnosis".
                        For
                        > > instance, many New Age groups seem to connect the term "gnosis"
                        to
                        > > attaining some kind of psychic powers... so what it is they are
                        > > to "know" is how to attain those powers.
                        > >
                        > > In my perspective, when we bring that focus down to the
                        historical
                        > > Gnostics the subject gains a more specific meaning. According to
                        > > Gnostic texts Gnosis is a multifold and comprehensive
                        understanding
                        > > that includes very specific cosmological knowledge, personal
                        > > knowledge, and hermeneutic understanding. More specifically, what
                        we
                        > > must know is who we are within a wider spiritual cosmology, and
                        how we
                        > > as individuals relate to that cosmology (where we are from, and
                        where
                        > > we can return).
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >>>> Is it the dusty ramblings in the many and sometimes
                        contridictory
                        > >>>>
                        > > texts? Is it mythologies and analogies? Or is there something
                        more?
                        > > Why would there be all this learning if we are still trapped in
                        our
                        > > perspectives and do not realize the greater reality that exists
                        beyond
                        > > what we see, hear, taste, smell and feel?<<<
                        > >
                        > > In traditional "dusty" Gnostic thinking, it is the act of
                        > > understanding itself that frees one from the confines of pure
                        material
                        > > reactonary perspective. This is very much like the destinction
                        between
                        > > a priori knowing vs a posteriori knowing in that it is a knowing
                        that
                        > > goes beyond direct perception. The understaning in question must
                        > > contain both the experience based form of knowledge AND the
                        > > intellectual breakthrough in order to truly BE this
                        > > salvational "Gnosis".
                        > >
                        > > I can put that more simply. Imagine you and I were part of a
                        > > traditional Gnostic sect, and you were my teacher. Now since I am
                        a
                        > > person who is not familiar with the "mystery" you are going to
                        teach
                        > > me, you would have to start by helping me understand HOW to
                        > > contextualize things correctly for the system. You might give me
                        some
                        > > ritual activities, or meditations, meant to widen my awareness
                        and
                        > > evoke spiritual experiences. At the same time you would likely
                        work on
                        > > my ability to conceptualize things I had not previously
                        understood.
                        > > Eventually I will have to come to understand a cosmology that
                        includes
                        > > several very complicated notions of infinity, and what they have
                        to do
                        > > with me. I will have to gain that understanding by connecting the
                        two
                        > > methods you are using to teach me.
                        > >
                        > > As Plato said...
                        > >
                        > > "This knowledge is not something that can be learned only through
                        > > words like other sciences; but rather after long-continued
                        intercourse
                        > > between teacher and pupil, in joint pursuit of the subject,
                        suddenly,
                        > > like light flashing forth when a fire is kindled, it is born in
                        the
                        > > soul and straightway nourishes itself."
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >>>> What marks a moment of 'gnosis', is it to allow our
                        perspectives
                        > >>>>
                        > > (or mind) to transend reality as we know it? Is this the 'goal'
                        > > or 'holy grail' that we are to seek?<<<
                        > >
                        > > Although Gnosis has moments of breakthrough presenting it (the
                        light
                        > > flashing forth), epiphanies, we should be careful not to confuse
                        it
                        > > with the moment of mystical experience. Gnosis, in the
                        traditional
                        > > meaning, isn't an event or a moment, it is the attainment of a
                        process
                        > > that gives an entire perspective.
                        > >
                        > > In other words, once you have taught me what I am supposed to
                        know
                        > > then if I have not had spiritual experience I don't
                        have "Gnosis". At
                        > > the same time, if I don't have understanding of the meaning of
                        those
                        > > dusty texts I ALSO don't have Gnosis. One is just a happening,
                        while
                        > > the other is just a context. A true full comprehension (gnosis)
                        must
                        > > have both the event and the context.
                        > >
                        > > Knowing how to build the bike is not Gnosis. Having the ability
                        to
                        > > ride the bike is not Gnosis either. Gnosis is a complete
                        understanding
                        > > of the bike... how to make it, how to ride it, and finally where
                        that
                        > > bike will take you.
                        > >
                        > > Anyone here disagree or have thoughts?
                        > >
                        > > PMCV
                        > >
                        > >
                        > Neither, but what role does meditation have in all this?
                        > >
                        > >
                        >
                      • pmcvflag
                        Mike ... Hmmmm. That could depend on what kind of meditation one is talking about, I guess. PMCV
                        Message 11 of 19 , Nov 13, 2006
                          Mike

                          >>>Neither, but what role does meditation have in all this?<<<

                          Hmmmm. That could depend on what kind of "meditation" one is talking
                          about, I guess.

                          PMCV
                        • pmcvflag
                          Darkchylde ... effect on my life (which was in a serious downward spiral at the time) was just a time sitting with a cat on my lap and contemplating what was
                          Message 12 of 19 , Nov 13, 2006
                            Darkchylde

                            >>>My momnet I believe I had of gnosis, which had a transforming
                            effect on my life (which was in a serious downward spiral at the
                            time) was just a time sitting with a cat on my lap and contemplating
                            what was it was that distinquished life inside matter, the Epinoia
                            (although I didn't actually learn that term till later, I was barely
                            thru the Gospel of Thomas and the Apoch. of John then)I was trying to
                            see the iife in the crude matter and for just a moment, I saw
                            something, hard to describe, but like a light was in the eyes of the
                            cat, and this same light seemed to eminate from the plants in the
                            window, and seemed to even float by in the very air in thin streams,
                            and at that moment I felt an awareness, for lack of a better word, of
                            myself, the cat, the recliner, the room, the outside ground, it went
                            on and on and I was truly connected to everything and everone and I
                            was aware of molecules and stars all at the some moment. Everything
                            seemed an amazing dance of precision and chaos, of dark and light all
                            intwined, and of a supernal light which dimmed the ilght of stars and
                            sun and which existed in ever radiating streams and I craved this
                            light, I think, before I was back in the chair with a cat giving me a
                            weird look.<<<

                            What you are calling "Gnosis" here, I would more generally refer to
                            as a specific type of "mystical experience". There can be no doubt
                            that a form of meditation generally is used to gain this experience,
                            and it is transformative. Gnostic texts do describe visionary
                            experiences like this one as part of the process toward Gnosis.

                            PMCV
                          • imdarkchylde
                            I just felt it to be a moment of gnosis as I didn t just hear about from a second party, or read it, I KNEW the connection I had to the ALL, the Unmainifest.
                            Message 13 of 19 , Nov 13, 2006
                              I just felt it to be a moment of 'gnosis' as I didn't just hear about
                              from a second party, or read it, I KNEW the connection I had to the
                              ALL, the Unmainifest. It wasn't due to visualization (although I
                              think that to be a usefull and necessary tool in meditation) albeit
                              it may have been triggered by my contemplations on the Epinoia. I
                              came back with that 'water splashed in the face feeling' and it left
                              me irrevocably changed. If I had never experienced it, I would
                              probably still believe as I do now, but I wouldn't KNOW. It is one
                              thing to read about it, contemplate it, talk about it, but it quite
                              another to experience it.
                              You know?
                              LOL
                              Whirled and inner peas
                              DarkChylde


                              --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, pmcvflag <no_reply@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Darkchylde
                              >
                              > >>>My momnet I believe I had of gnosis, which had a transforming
                              > effect on my life (which was in a serious downward spiral at the
                              > time) was just a time sitting with a cat on my lap and
                              contemplating
                              > what was it was that distinquished life inside matter, the Epinoia
                              > (although I didn't actually learn that term till later, I was
                              barely
                              > thru the Gospel of Thomas and the Apoch. of John then)I was trying
                              to
                              > see the iife in the crude matter and for just a moment, I saw
                              > something, hard to describe, but like a light was in the eyes of
                              the
                              > cat, and this same light seemed to eminate from the plants in the
                              > window, and seemed to even float by in the very air in thin
                              streams,
                              > and at that moment I felt an awareness, for lack of a better word,
                              of
                              > myself, the cat, the recliner, the room, the outside ground, it
                              went
                              > on and on and I was truly connected to everything and everone and I
                              > was aware of molecules and stars all at the some moment. Everything
                              > seemed an amazing dance of precision and chaos, of dark and light
                              all
                              > intwined, and of a supernal light which dimmed the ilght of stars
                              and
                              > sun and which existed in ever radiating streams and I craved this
                              > light, I think, before I was back in the chair with a cat giving me
                              a
                              > weird look.<<<
                              >
                              > What you are calling "Gnosis" here, I would more generally refer to
                              > as a specific type of "mystical experience". There can be no doubt
                              > that a form of meditation generally is used to gain this
                              experience,
                              > and it is transformative. Gnostic texts do describe visionary
                              > experiences like this one as part of the process toward Gnosis.
                              >
                              > PMCV
                              >
                            • Michael Leavitt
                              Let s start with the garden variety type, any visualizing type, or....
                              Message 14 of 19 , Nov 13, 2006
                                Let's start with the garden variety type, any visualizing type, or....

                                pmcvflag wrote:
                                > Mike
                                >
                                >
                                >>>> Neither, but what role does meditation have in all this?<<<
                                >>>>
                                >
                                > Hmmmm. That could depend on what kind of "meditation" one is talking
                                > about, I guess.
                                >
                                > PMCV
                                >
                                >
                                >
                              • pmcvflag
                                Mike ... visualizing type, or....
                                Message 15 of 19 , Nov 14, 2006
                                  Mike

                                  >>>Let's start with the garden variety type (of meditation), any
                                  visualizing type, or....<<<

                                  I DO think that traditional Gnostics had a number of meditation
                                  techniques. I am guessing you would agree. I think that many people
                                  today kind of think of the psychology/biofeedback kind, or something
                                  that is a loose mixing of this with a kind of semi eastern style, when
                                  they hear the word "meditation". I think that this is valuable but not
                                  likely to have been part of Gnostic practice. Instead, what we
                                  generally see both in the texts and in accounts about the Gnostics
                                  leans more towards meditation techniques that are more closely
                                  connected to ritual initiation, glossolalia, intellectual expansion,
                                  and as you mention.... a sort of visualization.

                                  Of course, some of this may be dependant on which sect we are talking
                                  about, but I think much of this was pretty common to the philosophical
                                  Mystery schools of the time.

                                  As far as what it has to do with Gnosis? When I read Allogenes, for
                                  instance, it seems to me that there is an implied cycle, though I may
                                  reading that eisegetically because of my own spiritual inclinations. I
                                  see periods of questioning and intellectual revelation offset by a
                                  sort of visualization. This would fit in with how these various
                                  Hellenist mysteries seemed to view Plato's notion of "Gnosis" as a
                                  spiritual function. More explicitely, the attributes I listed some
                                  time back that we can find in the texts directly outlining Gnosis
                                  certainly demonstrate this multifold definition (and process) as well.
                                  Some types of meditation seem to bridge the experience with the
                                  cognitive in a way that could very easily be implied by the very
                                  definition of the word "Gnosis" in this context.

                                  In other words, I would say that some types of meditation were thought
                                  to be an important aspect of the process towards Gnosis, just as the
                                  mystical experience seems to be.

                                  PMCV


                                  > >
                                  > > Hmmmm. That could depend on what kind of "meditation" one is
                                  talking
                                  > > about, I guess.
                                  > >
                                  > > PMCV
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  >
                                • pmcvflag
                                  Darkchylde ... about from a second party, or read it, I KNEW the connection I had to the ALL, the Unmainifest.
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Nov 14, 2006
                                    Darkchylde

                                    >>>I just felt it to be a moment of 'gnosis' as I didn't just hear
                                    about from a second party, or read it, I KNEW the connection I had to
                                    the ALL, the Unmainifest.<<<

                                    Ah, I see what you mean. I had thought you were connecting the
                                    word "Gnosis" to the experience itself, but if I understand you now
                                    you mean to connect it to a sort of realization that contextualized
                                    the experience. Is that correct? It may sound like hair splitting, but
                                    the destinction could actually be very very important.

                                    >>>It wasn't due to visualization (although I think that to be a
                                    usefull and necessary tool in meditation) albeit it may have been
                                    triggered by my contemplations on the Epinoia. I came back with
                                    that 'water splashed in the face feeling' and it left me irrevocably
                                    changed. If I had never experienced it, I would probably still believe
                                    as I do now, but I wouldn't KNOW. It is one thing to read about it,
                                    contemplate it, talk about it, but it quite another to experience it.

                                    You know?<<<

                                    Yes, I do. You mentioned in a previous post how you may have taken the
                                    experience fery differently if you were, say, Catholic. I think that
                                    is a very good and important point... and very related to the subject
                                    of whether it is technically "Gnosis" or not. Many people who are more
                                    influenced by modern esoteric traditions equate the word with the
                                    experience itself. It is very often that we hear people say "look, I
                                    had this experience so now I have gnosis". In a modern sense of the
                                    word that is surely true, but I do find it unfortunate that people
                                    feel the need to foist this modern esoteric thinking back on
                                    traditional Gnostic thinking in such a way that causes them to misread
                                    the Gnostic texts.

                                    In the Gnostic texts this word is simply not a single cohesive
                                    experiencial instance. I do see how one could read Plato and think
                                    that is what he meant ("like a flash of light"), or read the Gnostic
                                    texts and believe they are talking about the mystical experience, but
                                    I think a closer reading shows this to be inaccurate. I think there is
                                    no question that the concept of Gnosis is used to describe more than
                                    one aspect of revelation, comprehension, and advancement on the
                                    initiatory path of the ancient Gnostics. The salvific effect
                                    of "Gnosis" is not generally attributed to a single event so far as I
                                    can remember from any of the texts (unless somebody else can think of
                                    an example).

                                    One could almost wonder if perhaps in modern English rather than
                                    claiming to have attained Gnosis, it could be more accurate to talk
                                    about various gnosises in a larger concept of Gnosis.... if that makes
                                    any sense. Just a thought.

                                    PMCV
                                  • imdarkchylde
                                    Blessings!! Sorry so long in responding. This post got buried in my inbox and I just now found it. Yes, that is exactly what I mean, and I don t think you are
                                    Message 17 of 19 , Nov 20, 2006
                                      Blessings!!
                                      Sorry so long in responding. This post got buried in my inbox and I
                                      just now found it.
                                      Yes, that is exactly what I mean, and I don't think you are splitting
                                      hairs at all. I believe words are specific for us to communicate
                                      with, and that did need to be explained, you just did a better job of
                                      it than I.
                                      But it wasn't just a 'single event' although that moment had the more
                                      dramatic in effect on me. It was the entire process of learning
                                      the 'truth' on 'God' and the spiritual realm, then in a state of
                                      relaxed contemplation could be seen as meditation, which culmulated
                                      into an event wherein I was made aware of the ALL, and my connection
                                      to it.
                                      Kinda like in the Hymn of the Pearl, where the real task had been
                                      forgotten and the child and messenger sent to get the pearl had begun
                                      to serve the other king, then recieves a letter from 'home' which
                                      reminded the child of the task at hand and of their real identity.
                                      Reading the texts were like the letter, it reminded me of the truth,
                                      and for a momnet my perspective allowed me to experience the truth.
                                      Without having learned the truth, or being 'reminded of it' I
                                      wouldn't have really understood what I was seeing and the
                                      comprehension brought about by the event would have also been awry.
                                      That was the point I was trying to make, without success I think.LOL
                                      Hope you walk in Light and Love!!
                                      WHirled and inner peas
                                      DarkChylde


                                      Gnothi Seauton
                                      **Love thy enemies. Messes with their heads!**

                                      --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, pmcvflag <no_reply@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > Darkchylde
                                      >
                                      > >>>I just felt it to be a moment of 'gnosis' as I didn't just hear
                                      > about from a second party, or read it, I KNEW the connection I had
                                      to
                                      > the ALL, the Unmainifest.<<<
                                      >
                                      > Ah, I see what you mean. I had thought you were connecting the
                                      > word "Gnosis" to the experience itself, but if I understand you now
                                      > you mean to connect it to a sort of realization that contextualized
                                      > the experience. Is that correct? It may sound like hair splitting,
                                      but
                                      > the destinction could actually be very very important.
                                      >
                                      > >>>It wasn't due to visualization (although I think that to be a
                                      > usefull and necessary tool in meditation) albeit it may have been
                                      > triggered by my contemplations on the Epinoia. I came back with
                                      > that 'water splashed in the face feeling' and it left me
                                      irrevocably
                                      > changed. If I had never experienced it, I would probably still
                                      believe
                                      > as I do now, but I wouldn't KNOW. It is one thing to read about it,
                                      > contemplate it, talk about it, but it quite another to experience
                                      it.
                                      >
                                      > You know?<<<
                                      >
                                      > Yes, I do. You mentioned in a previous post how you may have taken
                                      the
                                      > experience fery differently if you were, say, Catholic. I think
                                      that
                                      > is a very good and important point... and very related to the
                                      subject
                                      > of whether it is technically "Gnosis" or not. Many people who are
                                      more
                                      > influenced by modern esoteric traditions equate the word with the
                                      > experience itself. It is very often that we hear people say "look,
                                      I
                                      > had this experience so now I have gnosis". In a modern sense of the
                                      > word that is surely true, but I do find it unfortunate that people
                                      > feel the need to foist this modern esoteric thinking back on
                                      > traditional Gnostic thinking in such a way that causes them to
                                      misread
                                      > the Gnostic texts.
                                      >
                                      > In the Gnostic texts this word is simply not a single cohesive
                                      > experiencial instance. I do see how one could read Plato and think
                                      > that is what he meant ("like a flash of light"), or read the
                                      Gnostic
                                      > texts and believe they are talking about the mystical experience,
                                      but
                                      > I think a closer reading shows this to be inaccurate. I think there
                                      is
                                      > no question that the concept of Gnosis is used to describe more
                                      than
                                      > one aspect of revelation, comprehension, and advancement on the
                                      > initiatory path of the ancient Gnostics. The salvific effect
                                      > of "Gnosis" is not generally attributed to a single event so far as
                                      I
                                      > can remember from any of the texts (unless somebody else can think
                                      of
                                      > an example).
                                      >
                                      > One could almost wonder if perhaps in modern English rather than
                                      > claiming to have attained Gnosis, it could be more accurate to talk
                                      > about various gnosises in a larger concept of Gnosis.... if that
                                      makes
                                      > any sense. Just a thought.
                                      >
                                      > PMCV
                                      >
                                    • pmcvflag
                                      Hey Darkchylde ... more dramatic in effect on me. It was the entire process of learning the truth on God and the spiritual realm, then in a state of
                                      Message 18 of 19 , Nov 29, 2006
                                        Hey Darkchylde

                                        >>>But it wasn't just a 'single event' although that moment had the
                                        more dramatic in effect on me. It was the entire process of learning
                                        the 'truth' on 'God' and the spiritual realm, then in a state of
                                        relaxed contemplation could be seen as meditation, which culmulated
                                        into an event wherein I was made aware of the ALL, and my connection
                                        to it.<<<

                                        AH, yes... a process then. I believe we understand each other on
                                        that one.

                                        >>>Kinda like in the Hymn of the Pearl, where the real task had been
                                        forgotten and the child and messenger sent to get the pearl had begun
                                        to serve the other king, then recieves a letter from 'home' which
                                        reminded the child of the task at hand and of their real identity.
                                        Reading the texts were like the letter, it reminded me of the truth,
                                        and for a momnet my perspective allowed me to experience the truth.
                                        Without having learned the truth, or being 'reminded of it' I
                                        wouldn't have really understood what I was seeing and the
                                        comprehension brought about by the event would have also been awry.
                                        That was the point I was trying to make, without success I think.LOL
                                        Hope you walk in Light and Love!!<<<

                                        It seems to me, then, that the next issue would be about exactly
                                        what kind of cosmology and soteriology that these events and studies
                                        imply to the person in question (in this case you or I).

                                        PMCV
                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.