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

Re: Whats in a word?

Expand Messages
  • pmcvflag
    Wilbro, you ask CV, what is this difference between the Sophiac experience of the heart and Gnosis of which you speak? . I would tend to resist
    Message 1 of 13 , Jun 5, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Wilbro, you ask "CV, what is this difference between the Sophiac
      experience of the heart and Gnosis of which you speak?". I would tend
      to resist "psychologicising" my description, but the Jungian analysis
      seemed to work well between you and Lady Cary so let me try that.
      Don't take my description to directly here, as I am simply trying to
      start from a sort of physical perspective in my description.

      Ok, imagine your experience (I don't mean you special experience,
      just experience as a whole), what does it take for that experience to
      become a cogniscent thing? Gnostics have tended to see it this
      way.... you have certain elements to your understanding, one is
      experience, one is your personal perspective of it, and to offset
      your personal understanding there is the context given by the learned
      (and hopefully more objective) critical perspective. We can leave
      personal perception (and the perspective that follows) out of this
      since not only is it self explanitory, but I think we are in
      agreement that it is also (at least in part) illusory. What we are
      left with is the direct effect of the experience, the sort of
      intuited, experiential, "knowledge of the heart", and the severe
      critical examination that ballances it.

      To look at "Gnosis" in a Jungian sence then, what we see are two
      guides that lead us to it. The first is Sophia, she is the
      experience, the emotive, the event that changes our perspective
      directly by showing us things like... our insignificance against the
      reflection of the Bythos, our interconnection with other humans (or
      maybe "lack of differentiation" would be a better way to put it), our
      inner stumbling blocks, personal epiphanies, etc. The next guide is
      the Logos, who teaches through parable, by example, revelation,
      communication etc.

      With two guides we see to aspects of Gnosis, niether of which is
      complete without it's mate (in fact, it is because Sophia attempts to
      concieve without her propper mate that the world is said to have
      fallen in Gnostic myth). True Gnosis then is when both guides are
      active in ones spiritual understanding, lack of one or the other is
      not "Gnosis".

      As far as your webpage link, this looks like what Gnosticism may look
      like to a Catholic who thinks we are speaking in the same way they
      would. It is also how Manicheans believed things worked. Unlike
      Manicheans, Gnostics have not tended to believe that the "divine
      light" is in fact in all things. Instead, what you are more likely to
      see in the sources is the belief that most of the world is in fact
      not salvagable, and that only humans are "saved" and only on a very
      individual basis... through "Gnosis".

      On the other hand, if there is a "Big Crunch" (or the thermodynamic
      equalization would work as well if it meant the end of life,
      cognition, in the field of time) then one could very readily see that
      as a sort of "Gnostic" cosmic salvation.... sort of the "all things
      shall pass".

      Is it time to compare pages?

      PMCV



      --- In gnosticism2@y..., "wilbro99" <wilbro99@y...> wrote:
      > CV, what is this difference between the Sophiac experience of the
      > heart and Gnosis of which you speak? Since I am equating the first
      > part of Gnosis with Gnosis, I am willing to bet right now that we
      will
      > come out of this with you seeing my system as incomplete. Here is
      > something I just found online. Is this what you mean and do you
      take
      > what it says literally?
      >
      > http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/dissent/defgnost.htm
      >
      > "Gnostic salvation is not merely individual redemption of each
      human
      > soul; it is a cosmic process. It is the return of all things to
      > what they were before the flaw in the sphere of the Æons brought
      > matter into existence and imprisoned some part of the Divine
      > Light into the evil Hyle (Hyle)."
    • wilbro99
      CV, there was two paragraphs here full of questions that I have just wiped out for the reason the next paragraph will reveal. Then you say that Sophia, the
      Message 2 of 13 , Jun 5, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        CV, there was two paragraphs here full of questions that I have just
        wiped out for the reason the next paragraph will reveal.

        Then you say that Sophia, the experience, is to reveal things to us,
        and the Logos, which I assume is the critical examination, is supposed
        to do something else that I can't figure out. And then you fall back
        completely into the Gnostic-speak, and I throw up my hands. That
        doesn't mean that they may not be true, they just haven't flowered
        into true cognizance yet (I borrowed this line from your reply to
        Play). I can see no way to make progress here, and, more importantly,
        there is the sense that it is time to move on, I want to thank the
        crowd here for putting up with me. I shall now wink out of existence.
        Sharky, here's to that Place where the "Spirit" dwells!


        --- In gnosticism2@y..., pmcvflag <no_reply@y...> wrote:
        > Wilbro, you ask "CV, what is this difference between the Sophiac
        > experience of the heart and Gnosis of which you speak?". I would
        tend
        > to resist "psychologicising" my description, but the Jungian
        analysis
        > seemed to work well between you and Lady Cary so let me try that.
        > Don't take my description to directly here, as I am simply trying to
        > start from a sort of physical perspective in my description.
        >
        > Ok, imagine your experience (I don't mean you special experience,
        > just experience as a whole), what does it take for that experience
        to
        > become a cogniscent thing? Gnostics have tended to see it this
        > way.... you have certain elements to your understanding, one is
        > experience, one is your personal perspective of it, and to offset
        > your personal understanding there is the context given by the
        learned
        > (and hopefully more objective) critical perspective. We can leave
        > personal perception (and the perspective that follows) out of this
        > since not only is it self explanitory, but I think we are in
        > agreement that it is also (at least in part) illusory. What we are
        > left with is the direct effect of the experience, the sort of
        > intuited, experiential, "knowledge of the heart", and the severe
        > critical examination that ballances it.
        >
        > To look at "Gnosis" in a Jungian sence then, what we see are two
        > guides that lead us to it. The first is Sophia, she is the
        > experience, the emotive, the event that changes our perspective
        > directly by showing us things like... our insignificance against the
        > reflection of the Bythos, our interconnection with other humans (or
        > maybe "lack of differentiation" would be a better way to put it),
        our
        > inner stumbling blocks, personal epiphanies, etc. The next guide is
        > the Logos, who teaches through parable, by example, revelation,
        > communication etc.
        >
        > With two guides we see to aspects of Gnosis, niether of which is
        > complete without it's mate (in fact, it is because Sophia attempts
        to
        > concieve without her propper mate that the world is said to have
        > fallen in Gnostic myth). True Gnosis then is when both guides are
        > active in ones spiritual understanding, lack of one or the other is
        > not "Gnosis".
        >
        > As far as your webpage link, this looks like what Gnosticism may
        look
        > like to a Catholic who thinks we are speaking in the same way they
        > would. It is also how Manicheans believed things worked. Unlike
        > Manicheans, Gnostics have not tended to believe that the "divine
        > light" is in fact in all things. Instead, what you are more likely
        to
        > see in the sources is the belief that most of the world is in fact
        > not salvagable, and that only humans are "saved" and only on a very
        > individual basis... through "Gnosis".
        >
        > On the other hand, if there is a "Big Crunch" (or the thermodynamic
        > equalization would work as well if it meant the end of life,
        > cognition, in the field of time) then one could very readily see
        that
        > as a sort of "Gnostic" cosmic salvation.... sort of the "all things
        > shall pass".
        >
        > Is it time to compare pages?
        >
        > PMCV
        >
        >
        >
        > --- In gnosticism2@y..., "wilbro99" <wilbro99@y...> wrote:
        > > CV, what is this difference between the Sophiac experience of the
        > > heart and Gnosis of which you speak? Since I am equating the first
        > > part of Gnosis with Gnosis, I am willing to bet right now that we
        > will
        > > come out of this with you seeing my system as incomplete. Here is
        > > something I just found online. Is this what you mean and do you
        > take
        > > what it says literally?
        > >
        > > http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/dissent/defgnost.htm
        > >
        > > "Gnostic salvation is not merely individual redemption of each
        > human
        > > soul; it is a cosmic process. It is the return of all things to
        > > what they were before the flaw in the sphere of the Æons brought
        > > matter into existence and imprisoned some part of the Divine
        > > Light into the evil Hyle (Hyle)."
      • pmcvflag
        ... throw up my hands.
        Message 3 of 13 , Jun 6, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          > And then you fall back completely into the Gnostic-speak, and I
          throw up my hands.<

          Er, well, yes... this is a Gnostic club after all. Anyways, no one
          can say you didn't give it a go. Bon voyage, and happy hunting.

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