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

Re: [Gnosticism] Re: New Member

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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.