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

Re: What is life?

Expand Messages
  • ernststrohregenmantelrad
    sometimes I feel whether our friend Klaus has actually read the articles or just citing them for his convinience. I DO have the very article by E. Conze. It is
    Message 1 of 34 , Feb 3 5:18 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      sometimes I feel whether our friend Klaus has actually read the
      articles or just citing them for his convinience.

      I DO have the very article by E. Conze. It is in _Le Origni dello
      Gnosticismo_ ed. Bianchi 1967 Brill p. 651-667.

      titled "Buddhism and Gnosis"

      Notice the title? Yep, the author didn't say Gnostics He states,
      "This Buddhism I propose to compare with "Gnosis" rather then
      "the Gnosticis," because the connotation of the latter term is still
      so uncertain that this Congress has been specially convenend
      for the purpose of defining it." (p. 652)

      The author proposes 8 basic simiarities and 23 least possible
      similarities (but notice that the last 6 least possible simiarities
      are with Manichaeans.)

      The author didn't come to definite conclusion of the kinship
      between two and states, "All I can say is that there is here a
      definite problem, but as yet no definite solution. And what, of
      course, still remains to be seen is whether my alleged parallels
      will stand up to the scrutinty of the experts!" (p. 667)

      PMCV is right in saying that there is no historical connection
      linking these two movements. What we only have is similar
      typology. That is the exact same situation with so called Jewish
      Mystercism or what is known as Merkabah, Hekhalot and later
      what's became known as Kabbalah. And Jewish Mystercism and
      Gnosticism are much more close in geography but there is no
      direct connection between two. If there are connection they are
      incidental and minor.

      Anyway, if anyone is interested in the article I'll scan it but
      remember it is still a copy righted meterial.

      BTW, looking back PMCV did state "eastern religion" NOT
      specically Buddhism.

      --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, pmcvflag <no_reply@y...>
      wrote:
      > Mahayana is a very wide category, with a large number of
      sects...
      > some of which differ from each other quite strikingly.
      >
      > Sure there are similarities Klaus... as there are with nearly
      every
      > religion. I will even conceed that there are some very
      interesting
      > similarities in this particular case, but that does not mean
      there
      > are not very important differences as well. What is more
      important
      > though, is that similarities in no way imply ancestory or
      historical
      > relation. From the purely historical point of view, there is no
      > evidence that Mahayana actually existed before the common
      era. I
      > still remain unconvinced that there must have been some
      Indian
      > influence in the Hellenic movements when basic Roman
      attitude is
      > right there to provide the necessary ingredients.
      >
      >
      > Certain motifs crop up time and again in religion and
      philosophy...
      > without having to be directly gained from one particular source
      or
      > another. Schopenhauer is a good example of this in fact. He
      was
      > surprized with the similarities he found with ideas he believed
      he
      > had invented had to eastern religions. His comparative
      analysis was
      > drawn after the fact.
      >
      > PMCV
      >
      > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, klaus schilling <
      pessy@c...>
      > wrote:
      > > pmcvflag writes:
      > > > eastern religion, which
      > > > is in some wasy the exact opposite of Gnosticism.
      > > >
      > > No, mahayana buddhism is in many ways very similar to
      Gnosticism,
      > > as shown by Edward Conze.
      > >
      > > Klaus Schilling
    • lady_caritas
      ... Say, Ernst, would you humor me and translate the gist of this post for the majority of members who don t speak German? Thanks much, Cari
      Message 34 of 34 , Feb 7 7:22 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, ernststrohregenmantelrad
        <no_reply@y...> wrote:
        > >--- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, klaus schilling <>
        > >pessy@c...> wrote:
        > > ernststrohregenmantelrad writes:
        > > >
        > > > I thought Sufi was a part of Islam or did I miss something?
        > >
        > > For Schopenhauer, Sufi is of vedantic origin,
        > > disguised as Islam.
        > >
        > > Klaus Schilling
        >
        > Mensch, es gibt zu viel DDHG* bei dir!
        >
        > Du hebst so oft AS in den Himmel!
        >
        > Du nimmst die Meinung Schopenhauer als die Tatsache.
        >
        > Die ist nur einer der Meinungen von der Ursprung.
        >
        > *Der Doktor hat gesagt- wird benutzt vom Anthroposoph, der
        > hebt Steiner in den Himmel. In diesen Fall machst du mit
        > Schopenhauer so wie so Anthroposoph mit Steiner.


        Say, Ernst, would you humor me and translate the gist of this post
        for the majority of members who don't speak German?

        Thanks much,

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