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

Re: Searching for answers (2)

Expand Messages
  • hey_market
    No more than the ladies in Tibet do. In fact, while academics tend to think of pagan pursuers of gnosis as Hermetics and traditional ancient Gnostics as
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 5, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      No more than the ladies in Tibet do. In fact,
      while academics tend to think of pagan pursuers of
      gnosis as Hermetics and traditional ancient Gnostics as
      Christian, the latter were altogether different Christians
      than anything you might come across in, say,
      Missouri.<br><br>In the "Show Me" state or anywhere else, Gnostics
      wouldn't be inclined to show you the Old Testament, much
      less the Ten Commandments. See, some ancient Gnostic
      groups outright opposed the Old Testament, whereas might
      not have been so critical, but in any case, they all
      pretty much agreed that there was a way of seeing
      reality that superceded the Old Testament, thereby making
      it irrelevant.<br><br>I might add that in the
      (mythically-oriented) mind of most Gnostics, the God of this world
      (ostensibly the same God that we see in the Old Testament) is
      ignorant at best, or downright evil at worst. That is,
      there is a higher God or higher reality beyond this
      reality.<br><br>Thus, we seek to escape this world, in some sense,
      which tries to contain us. And what we escape to is
      this greater reality, which the Tibetan Buddhist monks
      would describe as "nothingness" while Gnostics would
      describe as "the fullness." This seems to be a
      contradition, but they were refering to the same thing.
      <br><br>How could that be? Well, the logic is that the next
      world, is obviously invisible (nothing, or else a world
      of nothingness, according to our limited
      perception), whereas the next world is everything (thus, the
      fullness) compared to this world. Make
      sense?<br><br>Anyway, note that I pointed out that the Gnostics were
      mythically oriented. Thus, they didn't believe in an actual
      physical being with a beard who parted the clouds and
      created a vast, disataterous place, which we know as our
      cosmos.<br>Rather, they used myth to explain a reality, and the
      reality they perceived is that there is something about
      this world that divides us from somethign better. In
      fact, this inner longing for something better, when
      properly understood, is a yearning for a divine roots and
      divine connectedness--the reality of our identity.
      <br><br>It is a memory of something--our very selves--that
      occured before this limitation or separation which is our
      existence. Speaking of which, we can be as optimistic or
      pessimistic as we like about this existence, but we certainly
      can't argue that the basis situation is that we're
      limited and spearate. That is, we're born in separate
      bodies with limited ability to transcend this
      body.<br><br>However, we do have a divine spark within us that informs
      us that we are something more than what we seem to
      be. Foir Gnostics, it is this spark which we shoudl
      tend to. <br><br>Thus, many Gnostics were antinomian,
      which is a fancy way of saying they were opposed to
      laws. The reason for this basically was, again, their
      belief that there is a higher, yet inner law of God
      within us--and all other laws, being worldly oriented,
      are likely to go wrong and obfuscate divine
      justice.<br><br>Mind you, not ALL Gnostics thought entirely this way.
      In fact, many were moderate and said give unto Caser
      what is Caesar's, including his laws--the laws of the
      state, or as the case may be, the state religion.
      <br><br>So, opinions varied, which is one of the
      distinguishing hallmarks of the Gnostics. They're hiterodox,
      which is a fancy way of saying that they all didn't
      think alike.<br><br>However, when it came to the 10
      Commandments, they were fairly unianimous in being ambivilent
      at best, even if they seemingly ironically they were
      influenced by ancient Jewish culture.<br><br>Does this make
      sense?
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.