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

Re: [Gnosticism] Re: New Member

Expand Messages
  • rajinder
    Hi, here are my comments:- ... From: wherecar54 To: gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 3:14 PM Subject: [Gnosticism] Re: New Member Hi
    Message 1 of 5 , Apr 7, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi,
       
      here are my comments:-
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 3:14 PM
      Subject: [Gnosticism] Re: New Member

      Hi Everyone,

      There are some great thoughts on this thread. I wish to add some
      comments.

      Hey Market wrote:And so, we may reject this REALITY, through first we
      recognize what we are rejecting.

      My thoughts: While it is true, that in Gnostic fashion, we reject
      this reality, in recognizing what we are rejecting, we must also
      understand the purpose of the reason for us as individuals being here
      in the first place.
      While we may not desire to be here, we must use the knowledge of who
      and what we are (strengths and shortcomings) to complete our tasks.
      In other words, we must not allow our dislike or lack of desire for
      this world to detract from us completing our purpose for being here
      in the first place. Otherwise, we most certainly will return to
      finish that lesson.
      By seeking Gnosis, we can become enlightened as to exactly what our
      individual purpose is.
      To those who know the Gnostic writings better than I, I hope you can
      post something along these lines of thought.
      First know what you see with your eyes and what is hidden would be known to you.  First become the son of Man, then you could become the son of God to know His mysteries.
       
      If you could tell me whether the Jews of flesh are faithful to Abraham or not, then you would know things about God.
       
      Rajinder


      --- In gnosticism2@y..., hey_market <no_reply@y...> wrote:
      > And per Philip, the illusory nature of the world is such that the
      > good is never really good, and the bad never really bad, because
      all
      > is made of a parodoxical and chaotic intermixture.
      >
      > That is the reality of this world, and it is a REALITY, even if it
      is
      > an illusory reality, if that makes any sense (well, I suppose if it
      > makes sense, it is a paraodoxical and chaotic sort of sense, which
      is
      > the only sort of sense that the world makes).
      >
      > And so, we may reject this REALITY, through first we recognize what
      > we are rejecting.
      >
      > As the great Gnsotic Valentinus tells us (through Clement, who
      > paraphrases him), gnosis is the knowledge of who we are, from
      whence
      > we came, INTO WHAT WE HAVE BEEN TRHOWN, and to what we shall return.
      >
      > Undoubtedly, we have been thrown into quite a messed-up mix, and
      Mr.
      > Khul, being bi-racial, you no doubt have you're own experience of
      > this sort of chaos and intervixture. But all considerations of skin
      > aside, we're all in the thick of the mix--none of us escapes it
      here
      > save through gnosis, which is the knowledge that we are more than
      > what we seem--we are more than this current reality, and in fact, a
      > divine spark within us tell us that who we really are and from
      whence
      > we came.
      >
      > And the place we came from is the place unto which we will return,
      > and it is a common, transcendent reality--a place without and
      beyond
      > division. Fortunately, with gnosis, we can return to it now, for it
      > is none other than the consciosness of this reality.
      >
      > When we experience this consciousness, we might already be said to
      > have returned to it.
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In gnosticism2@y..., "Gerry" <gerryhsp@y...> wrote:
      > > Reply to Khaldun's message #5731
      > >
      > > 
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > 
      > >
      > > "One of the wickedest places" you've ever been, huh?  I can't
      quite
      > tell if you mean that literally, as one of the "worst" places, or
      in
      > the vernacular, as one of the "baddest" places around.  No worries,
      > though.  I lived in Georgia for a few years, and as with most
      things,
      > I can take those comments either way.
      > >
      > > 
      > >
      > > First off, I'd like to say that I hope everyone hasn't had the
      same
      > problems posting and accessing posts as some of us have had. 
      Yahoo's
      > new Groups format may take some getting used to.  Anyway, I thought
      > I'd take the chance to respond tonight while I could finally get
      > through, but as my eyes are shutting on me, forgive me if you find
      > this even more incoherent than usual.
      > >
      > > 
      > >
      > > >>The texts that I've read were not really shocking, but they
      > seriously moved me and now I have this conscience about the whole
      > thing.<<
      > >
      > > 
      > >
      > > I wonder if the lack of shock-value might stem from the fact that
      > you already find yourself with a conscience?  I can see where the
      > greatest disturbance might be found by one with deep convictions in
      a
      > radically different understanding, e.g., an orthodox belief system.
      > >
      > > 
      > >
      > > >>But it makes sense or else why would Jesus himself advise us to
      > renounce the things of this world and to repent??<<
      > >
      > > 
      > >
      > > Well, it makes sense to me as well, and yet, I wonder what
      exactly
      > you mean by "renouncing" and "repenting."  I certainly think that
      his
      > teachings meant for us to find the value in "transcending" this
      > world, but your comments make me wonder as to what moral judgments
      > might have come attached with them.
      > >
      > > 
      > >
      > > I don't mean to suggest there that Gnostics didn't have moral
      > concerns, but I think they had a deeper appreciation that sort of
      > mitigated those questions.  Unable to put my hands right now on my
      > favorite quote regarding this topic, I do like what Elaine Pagels
      had
      > to say about moral preconceptions:
      > >
      > > 
      > >
      > > "The gnostic author of the Gospel of Philip rejects this whole
      way
      > of thinking.  As this author sees it, no act in itself—and
      > specifically neither celibacy nor marriage—is necessarily good or
      > bad.  Instead the moral significance of any act depends upon the
      > situation, intentions, and level of consciousness of the
      > participants."
      > >
      > > —    Adam, Eve, and the Serpent, pg. 71.
      > >
      > > 
      > >
      > > IOW, I see a difference between recognizing the illusory nature
      of
      > the world and going out of one's way in completely rejecting all
      > things worldly.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Gerry


      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      gnosticism2-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
    • rajinder
      Hi, Comments again:- ... From: hey_market To: gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 10:04 PM Subject: [Gnosticism] Re: New Member Who says
      Message 2 of 5 , Apr 7, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi,
         
        Comments again:-
         
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 10:04 PM
        Subject: [Gnosticism] Re: New Member

        Who says that we have any other purpose than to return from
        whence we came?
         
        Yes.  Man leaves his Mother (Holy Spirit) and Father (God)to join his wife, flesh, in the womb of the woman, then they are no more two but one.  What God has joined together man should not put it asunder as in abortion.
         
        This world is our father in laws house and we have to live to our Father's expectations.
         
         Moreoever, can there be any higher goal than
        this? As for any lesser goals, from whence do they come? 

        I'm inclined to think they come from lessor Gods, such as the
        mythic Demiurge, who no doubt would be delighted at the
        prospect of not only teaching us his lessons about who's boss,
        as well as setting us to his task and purposes, but most
        especially he'd take delight in forcing out return if we have not
        learned his lesson.

        In any case, as you say, if we first see what is before us, then we
        may see what is hidden. True enough, but what Gnostics see
        before them is a corpse.  And yet, it is critical to note, Gnostics
        never fail to see that this corpse is enlivened by something
        deeper, something hidden. A divine spark.
        Yes.  For gnostics, unless you face death (of ego) whilst still living, you cannot perceive God.
         
        So, they see living in spirit people as corpses.


        It is this hidden spirit which we hold in esteem, not that which
        holds it, or should I say, entraps it? This is a mere container.
         
        Yes.  Real self is within us that is perceived and not seen.  The outside flesh is seen by the others.

        Now then, does such a viewpoint betray a blatant disregard for
        the world to the point that Gnostics should be deemed "world
        haters?"
         
        God is all love and hating is of the Satan.  How could you hate your mother who gave birth to you?


        Not at all.

        If anything, they would be world savers, if at all possible, though
        the proper Gnostic stance towards activism of any kind is a
        whole other topic.

        However, very much on topic, one can say quite decisively that
        Gnostics love the world, just not uncritically.  To put it another
        way, they have a sublime appreciation for the dual nature of the
        world, and to say the least, they appreciate some parts of this
        mixture more than others.

        In short, they love the only world that really matters, which is not
        the world of matter, or more exactly stated, the world that matters
        does not correspond to the world of matter, yet it resides within it.
        And as long as the two are conjoined, Gnostics would refrain
        from throwing out the squeaky clean baby with the unholy
        bathwater.

        Rajinder

        --- In gnosticism2@y..., "rajinder" <rajinder.nijjhar@n...> wrote:
        > Hi,
        >
        > here are my comments:-
        >
        >   ----- Original Message -----
        >   From: wherecar54
        >   To: gnosticism2@y...
        >   Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 3:14 PM
        >   Subject: [Gnosticism] Re: New Member
        >
        >
        >   Hi Everyone,
        >
        >   There are some great thoughts on this thread. I wish to add
        some
        >   comments.
        >
        >   Hey Market wrote:And so, we may reject this REALITY, through
        first we
        >   recognize what we are rejecting.
        >
        >   My thoughts: While it is true, that in Gnostic fashion, we reject
        >   this reality, in recognizing what we are rejecting, we must also
        >   understand the purpose of the reason for us as individuals
        being here
        >   in the first place.
        >   While we may not desire to be here, we must use the
        knowledge of who
        >   and what we are (strengths and shortcomings) to complete
        our tasks.
        >   In other words, we must not allow our dislike or lack of desire
        for
        >   this world to detract from us completing our purpose for being
        here
        >   in the first place. Otherwise, we most certainly will return to
        >   finish that lesson.
        >   By seeking Gnosis, we can become enlightened as to exactly
        what our
        >   individual purpose is.
        >   To those who know the Gnostic writings better than I, I hope
        you can
        >   post something along these lines of thought.
        >   First know what you see with your eyes and what is hidden
        would be known to you.  First become the son of Man, then you
        could become the son of God to know His mysteries.
        >
        >   If you could tell me whether the Jews of flesh are faithful to
        Abraham or not, then you would know things about God.
        >
        >   Rajinder
        >
        >
        >   --- In gnosticism2@y..., hey_market <no_reply@y...> wrote:
        >   > And per Philip, the illusory nature of the world is such that
        the
        >   > good is never really good, and the bad never really bad,
        because
        >   all
        >   > is made of a parodoxical and chaotic intermixture.
        >   >
        >   > That is the reality of this world, and it is a REALITY, even if it
        >   is
        >   > an illusory reality, if that makes any sense (well, I suppose if
        it
        >   > makes sense, it is a paraodoxical and chaotic sort of
        sense, which
        >   is
        >   > the only sort of sense that the world makes).
        >   >
        >   > And so, we may reject this REALITY, through first we
        recognize what
        >   > we are rejecting.
        >   >
        >   > As the great Gnsotic Valentinus tells us (through Clement,
        who
        >   > paraphrases him), gnosis is the knowledge of who we are,
        from
        >   whence
        >   > we came, INTO WHAT WE HAVE BEEN TRHOWN, and to
        what we shall return.
        >   >
        >   > Undoubtedly, we have been thrown into quite a messed-up
        mix, and
        >   Mr.
        >   > Khul, being bi-racial, you no doubt have you're own
        experience of
        >   > this sort of chaos and intervixture. But all considerations of
        skin
        >   > aside, we're all in the thick of the mix--none of us escapes it
        >   here
        >   > save through gnosis, which is the knowledge that we are
        more than
        >   > what we seem--we are more than this current reality, and in
        fact, a
        >   > divine spark within us tell us that who we really are and from
        >   whence
        >   > we came.
        >   >
        >   > And the place we came from is the place unto which we will
        return,
        >   > and it is a common, transcendent reality--a place without
        and
        >   beyond
        >   > division. Fortunately, with gnosis, we can return to it now, for
        it
        >   > is none other than the consciosness of this reality.
        >   >
        >   > When we experience this consciousness, we might already
        be said to
        >   > have returned to it.
        >   >
        >   >
        >   >
        >   > --- In gnosticism2@y..., "Gerry" <gerryhsp@y...> wrote:
        >   > > Reply to Khaldun's message #5731
        >   > >
        >   > > 
        >   > >
        >   > >
        >   > >
        >   > > 
        >   > >
        >   > > "One of the wickedest places" you've ever been, huh?  I
        can't
        >   quite
        >   > tell if you mean that literally, as one of the "worst" places, or
        >   in
        >   > the vernacular, as one of the "baddest" places around.  No
        worries,
        >   > though.  I lived in Georgia for a few years, and as with most
        >   things,
        >   > I can take those comments either way.
        >   > >
        >   > > 
        >   > >
        >   > > First off, I'd like to say that I hope everyone hasn't had the
        >   same
        >   > problems posting and accessing posts as some of us have
        had. 
        >   Yahoo's
        >   > new Groups format may take some getting used to. 
        Anyway, I thought
        >   > I'd take the chance to respond tonight while I could finally
        get
        >   > through, but as my eyes are shutting on me, forgive me if
        you find
        >   > this even more incoherent than usual.
        >   > >
        >   > > 
        >   > >
        >   > > >>The texts that I've read were not really shocking, but they
        >   > seriously moved me and now I have this conscience about
        the whole
        >   > thing.<<
        >   > >
        >   > > 
        >   > >
        >   > > I wonder if the lack of shock-value might stem from the
        fact that
        >   > you already find yourself with a conscience?  I can see
        where the
        >   > greatest disturbance might be found by one with deep
        convictions in
        >   a
        >   > radically different understanding, e.g., an orthodox belief
        system.
        >   > >
        >   > > 
        >   > >
        >   > > >>But it makes sense or else why would Jesus himself
        advise us to
        >   > renounce the things of this world and to repent??<<
        >   > >
        >   > > 
        >   > >
        >   > > Well, it makes sense to me as well, and yet, I wonder
        what
        >   exactly
        >   > you mean by "renouncing" and "repenting."  I certainly think
        that
        >   his
        >   > teachings meant for us to find the value in "transcending"
        this
        >   > world, but your comments make me wonder as to what
        moral judgments
        >   > might have come attached with them.
        >   > >
        >   > > 
        >   > >
        >   > > I don't mean to suggest there that Gnostics didn't have
        moral
        >   > concerns, but I think they had a deeper appreciation that
        sort of
        >   > mitigated those questions.  Unable to put my hands right
        now on my
        >   > favorite quote regarding this topic, I do like what Elaine
        Pagels
        >   had
        >   > to say about moral preconceptions:
        >   > >
        >   > > 
        >   > >
        >   > > "The gnostic author of the Gospel of Philip rejects this
        whole
        >   way
        >   > of thinking.  As this author sees it, no act in itself-and
        >   > specifically neither celibacy nor marriage-is necessarily
        good or
        >   > bad.  Instead the moral significance of any act depends
        upon the
        >   > situation, intentions, and level of consciousness of the
        >   > participants."
        >   > >
        >   > > -    Adam, Eve, and the Serpent, pg. 71.
        >   > >
        >   > > 
        >   > >
        >   > > IOW, I see a difference between recognizing the illusory
        nature
        >   of
        >   > the world and going out of one's way in completely rejecting
        all
        >   > things worldly.
        >   > >
        >   > >
        >   > >
        >   > > Gerry
        >
        >
        >   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        >   gnosticism2-unsubscribe@y...
        >
        >
        >
        >   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
        Service.



        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        gnosticism2-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
      • hey_market
        Who says that we have any other purpose than to return from whence we came? Moreoever, can there be any higher goal than this? As for any lesser goals, from
        Message 3 of 5 , Apr 8, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          Who says that we have any other purpose than to return from
          whence we came? Moreoever, can there be any higher goal than
          this? As for any lesser goals, from whence do they come?

          I'm inclined to think they come from lessor Gods, such as the
          mythic Demiurge, who no doubt would be delighted at the
          prospect of not only teaching us his lessons about who's boss,
          as well as setting us to his task and purposes, but most
          especially he'd take delight in forcing out return if we have not
          learned his lesson.

          In any case, as you say, if we first see what is before us, then we
          may see what is hidden. True enough, but what Gnostics see
          before them is a corpse. And yet, it is critical to note, Gnostics
          never fail to see that this corpse is enlivened by something
          deeper, something hidden. A divine spark.

          It is this hidden spirit which we hold in esteem, not that which
          holds it, or should I say, entraps it? This is a mere container.

          Now then, does such a viewpoint betray a blatant disregard for
          the world to the point that Gnostics should be deemed "world
          haters?"

          Not at all.

          If anything, they would be world savers, if at all possible, though
          the proper Gnostic stance towards activism of any kind is a
          whole other topic.

          However, very much on topic, one can say quite decisively that
          Gnostics love the world, just not uncritically. To put it another
          way, they have a sublime appreciation for the dual nature of the
          world, and to say the least, they appreciate some parts of this
          mixture more than others.

          In short, they love the only world that really matters, which is not
          the world of matter, or more exactly stated, the world that matters
          does not correspond to the world of matter, yet it resides within it.
          And as long as the two are conjoined, Gnostics would refrain
          from throwing out the squeaky clean baby with the unholy
          bathwater.



          --- In gnosticism2@y..., "rajinder" <rajinder.nijjhar@n...> wrote:
          > Hi,
          >
          > here are my comments:-
          >
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: wherecar54
          > To: gnosticism2@y...
          > Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 3:14 PM
          > Subject: [Gnosticism] Re: New Member
          >
          >
          > Hi Everyone,
          >
          > There are some great thoughts on this thread. I wish to add
          some
          > comments.
          >
          > Hey Market wrote:And so, we may reject this REALITY, through
          first we
          > recognize what we are rejecting.
          >
          > My thoughts: While it is true, that in Gnostic fashion, we reject
          > this reality, in recognizing what we are rejecting, we must also
          > understand the purpose of the reason for us as individuals
          being here
          > in the first place.
          > While we may not desire to be here, we must use the
          knowledge of who
          > and what we are (strengths and shortcomings) to complete
          our tasks.
          > In other words, we must not allow our dislike or lack of desire
          for
          > this world to detract from us completing our purpose for being
          here
          > in the first place. Otherwise, we most certainly will return to
          > finish that lesson.
          > By seeking Gnosis, we can become enlightened as to exactly
          what our
          > individual purpose is.
          > To those who know the Gnostic writings better than I, I hope
          you can
          > post something along these lines of thought.
          > First know what you see with your eyes and what is hidden
          would be known to you. First become the son of Man, then you
          could become the son of God to know His mysteries.
          >
          > If you could tell me whether the Jews of flesh are faithful to
          Abraham or not, then you would know things about God.
          >
          > Rajinder
          >
          >
          > --- In gnosticism2@y..., hey_market <no_reply@y...> wrote:
          > > And per Philip, the illusory nature of the world is such that
          the
          > > good is never really good, and the bad never really bad,
          because
          > all
          > > is made of a parodoxical and chaotic intermixture.
          > >
          > > That is the reality of this world, and it is a REALITY, even if it
          > is
          > > an illusory reality, if that makes any sense (well, I suppose if
          it
          > > makes sense, it is a paraodoxical and chaotic sort of
          sense, which
          > is
          > > the only sort of sense that the world makes).
          > >
          > > And so, we may reject this REALITY, through first we
          recognize what
          > > we are rejecting.
          > >
          > > As the great Gnsotic Valentinus tells us (through Clement,
          who
          > > paraphrases him), gnosis is the knowledge of who we are,
          from
          > whence
          > > we came, INTO WHAT WE HAVE BEEN TRHOWN, and to
          what we shall return.
          > >
          > > Undoubtedly, we have been thrown into quite a messed-up
          mix, and
          > Mr.
          > > Khul, being bi-racial, you no doubt have you're own
          experience of
          > > this sort of chaos and intervixture. But all considerations of
          skin
          > > aside, we're all in the thick of the mix--none of us escapes it
          > here
          > > save through gnosis, which is the knowledge that we are
          more than
          > > what we seem--we are more than this current reality, and in
          fact, a
          > > divine spark within us tell us that who we really are and from
          > whence
          > > we came.
          > >
          > > And the place we came from is the place unto which we will
          return,
          > > and it is a common, transcendent reality--a place without
          and
          > beyond
          > > division. Fortunately, with gnosis, we can return to it now, for
          it
          > > is none other than the consciosness of this reality.
          > >
          > > When we experience this consciousness, we might already
          be said to
          > > have returned to it.
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > --- In gnosticism2@y..., "Gerry" <gerryhsp@y...> wrote:
          > > > Reply to Khaldun's message #5731
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > "One of the wickedest places" you've ever been, huh? I
          can't
          > quite
          > > tell if you mean that literally, as one of the "worst" places, or
          > in
          > > the vernacular, as one of the "baddest" places around. No
          worries,
          > > though. I lived in Georgia for a few years, and as with most
          > things,
          > > I can take those comments either way.
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > First off, I'd like to say that I hope everyone hasn't had the
          > same
          > > problems posting and accessing posts as some of us have
          had.
          > Yahoo's
          > > new Groups format may take some getting used to.
          Anyway, I thought
          > > I'd take the chance to respond tonight while I could finally
          get
          > > through, but as my eyes are shutting on me, forgive me if
          you find
          > > this even more incoherent than usual.
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > >>The texts that I've read were not really shocking, but they
          > > seriously moved me and now I have this conscience about
          the whole
          > > thing.<<
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > I wonder if the lack of shock-value might stem from the
          fact that
          > > you already find yourself with a conscience? I can see
          where the
          > > greatest disturbance might be found by one with deep
          convictions in
          > a
          > > radically different understanding, e.g., an orthodox belief
          system.
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > >>But it makes sense or else why would Jesus himself
          advise us to
          > > renounce the things of this world and to repent??<<
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Well, it makes sense to me as well, and yet, I wonder
          what
          > exactly
          > > you mean by "renouncing" and "repenting." I certainly think
          that
          > his
          > > teachings meant for us to find the value in "transcending"
          this
          > > world, but your comments make me wonder as to what
          moral judgments
          > > might have come attached with them.
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > I don't mean to suggest there that Gnostics didn't have
          moral
          > > concerns, but I think they had a deeper appreciation that
          sort of
          > > mitigated those questions. Unable to put my hands right
          now on my
          > > favorite quote regarding this topic, I do like what Elaine
          Pagels
          > had
          > > to say about moral preconceptions:
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > "The gnostic author of the Gospel of Philip rejects this
          whole
          > way
          > > of thinking. As this author sees it, no act in itself-and
          > > specifically neither celibacy nor marriage-is necessarily
          good or
          > > bad. Instead the moral significance of any act depends
          upon the
          > > situation, intentions, and level of consciousness of the
          > > participants."
          > > >
          > > > - Adam, Eve, and the Serpent, pg. 71.
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > IOW, I see a difference between recognizing the illusory
          nature
          > of
          > > the world and going out of one's way in completely rejecting
          all
          > > things worldly.
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Gerry
          >
          >
          > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          > gnosticism2-unsubscribe@y...
          >
          >
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
          Service.
        • hey_market
          Who says that we have any other purpose than to return from whence we came? Moreoever, can there be any higher goal than this? As for any lesser goals, from
          Message 4 of 5 , Apr 8, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            Who says that we have any other purpose than to return from
            whence we came? Moreoever, can there be any higher goal than
            this? As for any lesser goals, from whence do they come?

            I'm inclined to think they come from lessor Gods, such as the
            mythic Demiurge, who no doubt would be delighted at the
            prospect of not only teaching us his lessons about who's boss,
            as well as setting us to his task and purposes, but most
            especially he'd take delight in forcing out return if we have not
            learned his lesson.

            In any case, as you say, if we first see what is before us, then we
            may see what is hidden. True enough, but what Gnostics see
            before them is a corpse. And yet, it is critical to note, Gnostics
            never fail to see that this corpse is enlivened by something
            deeper, something hidden. A divine spark.

            It is this hidden spirit which we hold in esteem, not that which
            holds it, or should I say, entraps it? This is a mere container.

            Now then, does such a viewpoint betray a blatant disregard for
            the world to the point that Gnostics should be deemed "world
            haters?"

            Not at all.

            If anything, they would be world savers, if at all possible, though
            the proper Gnostic stance towards activism of any kind is a
            whole other topic.

            However, very much on topic, one can say quite decisively that
            Gnostics love the world, just not uncritically. To put it another
            way, they have a sublime appreciation for the dual nature of the
            world, and to say the least, they appreciate some parts of this
            mixture more than others.

            In short, they love the only world that really matters, which is not
            the world of matter, or more exactly stated, the world that matters
            does not correspond to the world of matter, yet it resides within it.
            And as long as the two are conjoined, Gnostics would refrain
            from throwing out the squeaky clean baby with the unholy
            bathwater.



            --- In gnosticism2@y..., "rajinder" <rajinder.nijjhar@n...> wrote:
            > Hi,
            >
            > here are my comments:-
            >
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: wherecar54
            > To: gnosticism2@y...
            > Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 3:14 PM
            > Subject: [Gnosticism] Re: New Member
            >
            >
            > Hi Everyone,
            >
            > There are some great thoughts on this thread. I wish to add
            some
            > comments.
            >
            > Hey Market wrote:And so, we may reject this REALITY, through
            first we
            > recognize what we are rejecting.
            >
            > My thoughts: While it is true, that in Gnostic fashion, we reject
            > this reality, in recognizing what we are rejecting, we must also
            > understand the purpose of the reason for us as individuals
            being here
            > in the first place.
            > While we may not desire to be here, we must use the
            knowledge of who
            > and what we are (strengths and shortcomings) to complete
            our tasks.
            > In other words, we must not allow our dislike or lack of desire
            for
            > this world to detract from us completing our purpose for being
            here
            > in the first place. Otherwise, we most certainly will return to
            > finish that lesson.
            > By seeking Gnosis, we can become enlightened as to exactly
            what our
            > individual purpose is.
            > To those who know the Gnostic writings better than I, I hope
            you can
            > post something along these lines of thought.
            > First know what you see with your eyes and what is hidden
            would be known to you. First become the son of Man, then you
            could become the son of God to know His mysteries.
            >
            > If you could tell me whether the Jews of flesh are faithful to
            Abraham or not, then you would know things about God.
            >
            > Rajinder
            >
            >
            > --- In gnosticism2@y..., hey_market <no_reply@y...> wrote:
            > > And per Philip, the illusory nature of the world is such that
            the
            > > good is never really good, and the bad never really bad,
            because
            > all
            > > is made of a parodoxical and chaotic intermixture.
            > >
            > > That is the reality of this world, and it is a REALITY, even if it
            > is
            > > an illusory reality, if that makes any sense (well, I suppose if
            it
            > > makes sense, it is a paraodoxical and chaotic sort of
            sense, which
            > is
            > > the only sort of sense that the world makes).
            > >
            > > And so, we may reject this REALITY, through first we
            recognize what
            > > we are rejecting.
            > >
            > > As the great Gnsotic Valentinus tells us (through Clement,
            who
            > > paraphrases him), gnosis is the knowledge of who we are,
            from
            > whence
            > > we came, INTO WHAT WE HAVE BEEN TRHOWN, and to
            what we shall return.
            > >
            > > Undoubtedly, we have been thrown into quite a messed-up
            mix, and
            > Mr.
            > > Khul, being bi-racial, you no doubt have you're own
            experience of
            > > this sort of chaos and intervixture. But all considerations of
            skin
            > > aside, we're all in the thick of the mix--none of us escapes it
            > here
            > > save through gnosis, which is the knowledge that we are
            more than
            > > what we seem--we are more than this current reality, and in
            fact, a
            > > divine spark within us tell us that who we really are and from
            > whence
            > > we came.
            > >
            > > And the place we came from is the place unto which we will
            return,
            > > and it is a common, transcendent reality--a place without
            and
            > beyond
            > > division. Fortunately, with gnosis, we can return to it now, for
            it
            > > is none other than the consciosness of this reality.
            > >
            > > When we experience this consciousness, we might already
            be said to
            > > have returned to it.
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > --- In gnosticism2@y..., "Gerry" <gerryhsp@y...> wrote:
            > > > Reply to Khaldun's message #5731
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > "One of the wickedest places" you've ever been, huh? I
            can't
            > quite
            > > tell if you mean that literally, as one of the "worst" places, or
            > in
            > > the vernacular, as one of the "baddest" places around. No
            worries,
            > > though. I lived in Georgia for a few years, and as with most
            > things,
            > > I can take those comments either way.
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > First off, I'd like to say that I hope everyone hasn't had the
            > same
            > > problems posting and accessing posts as some of us have
            had.
            > Yahoo's
            > > new Groups format may take some getting used to.
            Anyway, I thought
            > > I'd take the chance to respond tonight while I could finally
            get
            > > through, but as my eyes are shutting on me, forgive me if
            you find
            > > this even more incoherent than usual.
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > >>The texts that I've read were not really shocking, but they
            > > seriously moved me and now I have this conscience about
            the whole
            > > thing.<<
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > I wonder if the lack of shock-value might stem from the
            fact that
            > > you already find yourself with a conscience? I can see
            where the
            > > greatest disturbance might be found by one with deep
            convictions in
            > a
            > > radically different understanding, e.g., an orthodox belief
            system.
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > >>But it makes sense or else why would Jesus himself
            advise us to
            > > renounce the things of this world and to repent??<<
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Well, it makes sense to me as well, and yet, I wonder
            what
            > exactly
            > > you mean by "renouncing" and "repenting." I certainly think
            that
            > his
            > > teachings meant for us to find the value in "transcending"
            this
            > > world, but your comments make me wonder as to what
            moral judgments
            > > might have come attached with them.
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > I don't mean to suggest there that Gnostics didn't have
            moral
            > > concerns, but I think they had a deeper appreciation that
            sort of
            > > mitigated those questions. Unable to put my hands right
            now on my
            > > favorite quote regarding this topic, I do like what Elaine
            Pagels
            > had
            > > to say about moral preconceptions:
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > "The gnostic author of the Gospel of Philip rejects this
            whole
            > way
            > > of thinking. As this author sees it, no act in itself-and
            > > specifically neither celibacy nor marriage-is necessarily
            good or
            > > bad. Instead the moral significance of any act depends
            upon the
            > > situation, intentions, and level of consciousness of the
            > > participants."
            > > >
            > > > - Adam, Eve, and the Serpent, pg. 71.
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > IOW, I see a difference between recognizing the illusory
            nature
            > of
            > > the world and going out of one's way in completely rejecting
            all
            > > things worldly.
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Gerry
            >
            >
            > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > gnosticism2-unsubscribe@y...
            >
            >
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
            Service.
          • jjstroebel
            ... abortion.
            Message 5 of 5 , Apr 8, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              >>What God has joined together man should not put it asunder as in
              abortion.<<

              Oh come on. Is this for real??.
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.