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

Re: Clarification

Expand Messages
  • Will Brown
    Gerry, from #6777: Nonsense, Will! There s no crime in paying attention to detail with regards to posts of your personal quest or any other discussion,
    Message 1 of 2 , Oct 20, 2002
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Gerry, from #6777: Nonsense, Will! There's no crime in paying
      attention to detail with regards to posts of your personal quest or
      any other discussion, especially as you've done so in civil and
      entertaining fashion since we've been acquainted. I've yet to see you
      peddling inappropriate agenda anywhere.

      Heavens to Betsy there Gerry, let me show you my nasty side. I have
      been thinking about what bothers me about Gnosticism and have made
      many attempts to put it into words. It has to do with the line drawn
      between the spiritual and the material and how that line came to be
      drawn in the first place. Here is one of my attempts. I wasn't
      planning to release it, but since I have been accused of not being
      nasty, nor inappropriate, you asked for it. Grrrr and all that! Rating
      @ 100,000 Scoville Units!

      What follows is my view of Gnostic system. I am sure you will disabuse
      of any errors in my view of your system. The error to be transcended
      is defined as the world we live, think, imagine, and experience in.
      That means that we are part and parcel of the error. The truth to be
      found is the other world, the spiritual world. Unless there were some
      sort of bridge between the two, there would be no way of getting from
      one to the other, much less an inkling of it. That bridge is defined
      as an inner spark such that when we contact it we are in contact with
      that other world. Without such a bridge, and the contact with it, the
      system would not be self-consistent.

      Basically, there is a posit of two separate worlds, one
      incommensurable with the other, in which one of them is really fouled
      up and the other not. This is to be determined as fact from the fouled
      up world through an experience of the not fouled up world. Since those
      two worlds are incommensurable one with the other, there needs be a
      factor within the fouled up world to allow for an experience of the
      not fouled up world. If that is taken metaphorically, it fits many
      schemes of salvation through self-knowing, where the fouling-up factor
      is self-ignorance, or an incorrect grasp of oneself as oneself, and
      the error is revealed through experience. If it is not taken as
      metaphor, where in fact there is a material world separate from a
      spiritual world, that bridge, or inner spark, is a necessary item, and
      the experience of that inner spark is necessary to reveal the fact of
      the two incommensurable worlds. I do not see how it is possible for
      one to be a Gnostic and not take that separation as gospel, and this
      may be the flaw in my reasoning, but without that division, Gnosticism
      would not be Gnosticism.

      It is obviously possible to imagine another world, the spiritual
      world, a world absolutely separate from the material world, and if we
      are capable of imagining such a world we are also capable of imagining
      a given experience as representing a bridge experience. If there were,
      within the experiences capable of being experienced, a category of
      self-referential experiences that were capable of being sensed as
      experiences of a different nature, these self-referential experiences
      could not only be capable of being interpreted as bridge experiences,
      but could also engender the notion of having experienced another
      world, fostering the imagining of an other world. In other words, any
      experience taken as an experience of that inner spark is still open to
      being taken as only taken that way; and if such a choice of takes is
      possible, no certainty is possible in the matter.

      My conclusion is that Gnosticism, for all its assertions to the
      contrary, is a system that requires faith for any who adhere to it.
      That faith being that the experiences that authenticate it are what
      they seem to be. Given that the material world itself, the one we
      inhabit, is placed within the system as not being what it seems to be,
      an article of faith seems necessary to take any experience as a world
      transcending experience.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.