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

Re: role of sexuality/marriage/procreation...

Expand Messages
  • gavindouglas9
    to pmcvflag: to say that samael was in no way gnostic is like saying that einstein was in no way a scientist . anyone who has a direct mystical or
    Message 1 of 12 , Jul 11, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      to pmcvflag: to say that samael was 'in no way gnostic' is like
      saying that einstein was 'in no way a scientist'. anyone who has a
      direct mystical or spiritual experience has attained some gnosis, and
      is therefore a gnostic. perhaps you have some other definition,
      whereby a gnostic can only be a member of several communities which
      existed 2000 years ago? is christ only a statue to you? perhaps
      you're hoping they really will find his head buried at roslyn
      chapel? gnosis are not confined to a time and a place, any more than
      is sufism, or true zen, which are identical anyway, although i bet
      you'd like to differ on that!
      what is this 'negative work' you refer to? samael is the name of the
      real being samael, just as your own inner being will have its own
      particular name and vocation, etc. in past times, yes, masters have
      been known as demons as they were fallen. angels and demons have
      been known to switch sides, masters previously of the white lodge
      becoming even the chief of the black (yahweh), and disciples of the
      black lodge leaving there to join the white (v.m. beelzebub - see
      www.mysticweb.org, and 'the revolution of beelzebub') samael aun
      weor is said to mean samael on the highest, as he had raised himself
      up, finally, after having fallen during lemurian times and staying
      that way for a long time. also, don't confuse the boddhisattva with
      the inner being of the boddhisattva - the human person did
      not 'choose' his name, it was already there.
      you say that samael's teachings are not relevant to this club. well,
      sir, if you'll permit me, that is a very telling statement, and it
      could well be the reason that you have a 'club', and not a true
      esoteric order.
      relevance to the historical gnostics? how do you think those
      gnostics achieved their states and knowledge? do you suppose that
      there was some cherished, elusive secret to them that we will never
      know again? some people have been teaching all about it for the last
      fifty or so years, publicly - but many reject it because it does not
      resemble stale academic theory and does not come from books so
      ancient that they are virtually illegible, and so indecipherable that
      they only serve to baffle the enthusiastic groups formed around their
      study, complaining that they don't have the key to unlock it all.
      do you remember what jesus said to nicodemus? that he professed to
      be a teacher of men, and yet had to be told about the second
      birth, "know ye not of these things?" it was said that a man can
      only be born again through water (the transmuted semen) and fire (the
      spirit and its help). if you doubt this definition of water, sir,
      then please, next time you are conscious in the astral plane and see
      a lake, or the sea, please, reach down and touch the water with your
      finger, and TASTE IT.
      yes crowley used the term gnostic, and so he was - do you not know
      there are black gnostics and white gnostics? do you not know there
      is black sexual magic and white sexual magic? do you not know there
      are two serpents? the tempting one causing the fall from eden, and
      the bronze one associated most famously with moses, with which he
      healed the israelites and performed his wonders? as for 'spermo-
      gnostics', you should know that the sperm is handled internally,
      exclusively, by the students and masters of the white lodge, and
      externally by those of the black - do you have ears to hear?
      sex is the stone that was rejected by the builders of the temple, but
      which god set as the headstone - "it is the lord's doing and it is
      marvellous". what is it that the islamics circle around at mecca?
      do you know what is inside? do you know the mystery that mohammed
      left? do you know the meaning of the cubic stone?
      perhaps you think all this was different 2000 years ago? perhaps god
      does not have eternal values after all? perhaps the teachings of the
      solar religion follow fashion?

      to mike: maybe you do know a lot about samael aun weor, though i
      thought you would know that his teachings would seem to originate
      from his practice of the ancient tradition of tantrism, not the other
      way round... what is a canal going to transport if it is waterless?

      to the mysterious mrx: i'm not too sure exactly how your message
      fits in with all this, but women have never been excluded from true,
      occult, masonry. don't wish that freemasonry will some day admit
      women, because what does freemasonry have to offer our seeker sisters?
      i'm sure the vast majority of freemasons do not even know what the
      fragments and symbols they cling to really represent, so if you wish
      to know that and to study the true masonry you can find it in the
      books of samael aun weor, who practiced it with his priestess wife,
      litelantes.

      love and light to all......... gavin








      --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, pmcvflag <no_reply@y...> wrote:
      > Well, the main problem I see with that is the fact that Samael was
      in
      > no way "Gnostic". In fact, I find it rather amusing that the name
      he
      > chose for himself is specifically a very negative work in
      Gnosticism.
      >
      > Samael's teachings are no more relevent to this club than those of
      > Sylvia Browne. This is not to debate whether you feel they are
      true,
      > but whether they have any relevence to the historical Gnostics (I
      > will also point out at this time that many other modern groups that
      > have used the term "Gnostic", such as Crowley and his Spermo-
      > Gnostics, or the New Templars, are equaly as out of context for
      this
      > club unless you are making a specific point about how they relate
      to
      > Gnosticism as it is historically defined)
      >
      > PMCV
      >
      > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "gavindouglas9"
      > <gavindouglas9@h...> wrote:
      > > surely the gnostics on this site know of the teachings about
      white
      > > sexual magic, publicly taught by the christian gnostic samael aun
      > > weor in virtually all his books since about 1950? you know, the
      > > practice that was done by christ, buddha, hermes, zoroaster etc
      etc
      > > and which has been given to many gnostic students the world over?
      > > surely also, that as a result of practicing sex in this way,
      > > spiritually superior children can be born? anyone unclear or (god
      > > forbid) unknowledgeable about these teachings, contact me for a
      > > summary. oh, and for those who dismiss samael's teaching about
      > white
      > > lodge tantrism, is it not inconvenient for you that the dalai
      lama
      > > has also recently taught it? ('the power of compassion' -
      answering
      > > the question "is celibacy required for enlightenment?" etc).
      see?
      > > learning can be fun! gav
    • pmcvflag
      Hello Mr Gavin. Your post is very long, let me pick out the salient points. and answer them specifically. anyone who has a direct mystical or spiritual
      Message 2 of 12 , Jul 11, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello Mr Gavin. Your post is very long, let me pick out the salient
        points. and answer them specifically.

        "anyone who has a direct mystical or spiritual experience has
        attained some gnosis, and is therefore a gnostic."

        This is a common modern misunderstanding. However, the word "Gnosis"
        was in fact NOT coined to refer simply to the mystical experience.

        "perhaps you have some other definition, whereby a gnostic can only
        be a member of several communities which existed 2000 years ago?"

        If you have been paying attention in this club Mr Gavin, then you
        should know that this is exactly how we define "Gnosticism" in here.
        In fact, the word "Gnosticism" was invented by modern scholors to
        refer to exactly that. Any other definition you choose to use is fine
        for your own use, but it is a deviation from what the word
        technically means, and it is irrelevent to this club. Since this club
        is created for a specific purpose, this is not open to debate. If you
        don't like it then I would suggest moving on to another club that has
        no interest in history.

        To put it another way, you could also say that Samael was
        a "neanderthal", but since it is obvious that he technically cannot
        be a neanderthal, you would have to redefine the word (which, just
        like the word "Gnosticism", was invented by scholors) in order to
        make it work. If you go into a club that is talking about the REAL
        neanderthals (as it is technically defined), the other club members
        are going to laugh at you.

        "you say that samael's teachings are not relevant to this club. well,
        sir, if you'll permit me, that is a very telling statement, and it
        could well be the reason that you have a 'club', and not a true
        esoteric order."

        Yes, this IS only a club... and don't you forget it. Anyone who
        thinks they are going to find the true Gnostic experience online is
        deluded, so we are not even attempting it. Our purpose in this club
        (and I have stated it many times so let me capitalize it for you) is
        to STUDY THE BELIEFS AN PRACTICES OF TRADITIONAL (historic)
        GNOSTICISM, AND HOW THAT RELATES TO US IN THE MODERN WORLD.

        This is NOT a club for the study of general esotericism (and in truth
        our Freemason thread has gone somewhat offline). There are already a
        number of clubs out there for that purpose. As far as I know, this is
        the only club here in Yahoo that has our particular focus, so if that
        focus is not interesting to you, Gavin, you have many other clubs to
        choose from. Do NOT try to change the focus of this club to fit your
        desired topics though, the topic of this club is not open to debate.

        PMCV
      • Mike Leavitt
        Hello pmcvflag ... Iagree fully with you, and as to the Freemason thread, your point is well taken, I prefaced one of my last posts with sorry for the OT, and
        Message 3 of 12 , Jul 11, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          Hello pmcvflag

          On 11-Jul-03, you wrote:

          > Hello Mr Gavin. Your post is very long, let me pick out the salient
          > points. and answer them specifically.
          >
          > "anyone who has a direct mystical or spiritual experience has
          > attained some gnosis, and is therefore a gnostic."
          >
          > This is a common modern misunderstanding. However, the word "Gnosis"
          > was in fact NOT coined to refer simply to the mystical experience.
          >
          > "perhaps you have some other definition, whereby a gnostic can only
          > be a member of several communities which existed 2000 years ago?"
          >
          > If you have been paying attention in this club Mr Gavin, then you
          > should know that this is exactly how we define "Gnosticism" in here.
          > In fact, the word "Gnosticism" was invented by modern scholors to
          > refer to exactly that. Any other definition you choose to use is
          > fine for your own use, but it is a deviation from what the word
          > technically means, and it is irrelevent to this club. Since this
          > club is created for a specific purpose, this is not open to debate.
          > If you don't like it then I would suggest moving on to another club
          > that has no interest in history.
          >
          > To put it another way, you could also say that Samael was
          > a "neanderthal", but since it is obvious that he technically cannot
          > be a neanderthal, you would have to redefine the word (which, just
          > like the word "Gnosticism", was invented by scholors) in order to
          > make it work. If you go into a club that is talking about the REAL
          > neanderthals (as it is technically defined), the other club members
          > are going to laugh at you.
          >
          > "you say that samael's teachings are not relevant to this club.
          > well, sir, if you'll permit me, that is a very telling statement,
          > and it could well be the reason that you have a 'club', and not a
          > true esoteric order."
          >
          > Yes, this IS only a club... and don't you forget it. Anyone who
          > thinks they are going to find the true Gnostic experience online is
          > deluded, so we are not even attempting it. Our purpose in this club
          > (and I have stated it many times so let me capitalize it for you) is
          > to STUDY THE BELIEFS AN PRACTICES OF TRADITIONAL (historic)
          > GNOSTICISM, AND HOW THAT RELATES TO US IN THE MODERN WORLD.
          >
          > This is NOT a club for the study of general esotericism (and in
          > truth our Freemason thread has gone somewhat offline). There are
          > already a number of clubs out there for that purpose. As far as I
          > know, this is the only club here in Yahoo that has our particular
          > focus, so if that focus is not interesting to you, Gavin, you have
          > many other clubs to choose from. Do NOT try to change the focus of
          > this club to fit your desired topics though, the topic of this club
          > is not open to debate.
          >
          > PMCV

          Iagree fully with you, and as to the Freemason thread, your point is
          well taken, I prefaced one of my last posts with sorry for the OT,
          and it is time to take it to private mail or drop it.

          Regards
          --
          Mike Leavitt ac998@...
        • pmcvflag
          Oh no Mike, I hope you did not think that was in anyway meant to be directed as anything other than the recognition that we do get a little off topic on
          Message 4 of 12 , Jul 11, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            Oh no Mike, I hope you did not think that was in anyway meant to be
            directed as anything other than the recognition that we do get a
            little off topic on occasion (I have been talking about the
            Freemasons myself).... it is natural that we will. I simply point it
            out in case this is what has caused Mr Gavin to be confused about our
            intended focus of the club.

            > Iagree fully with you, and as to the Freemason thread, your point is
            > well taken, I prefaced one of my last posts with sorry for the OT,
            > and it is time to take it to private mail or drop it.
            >
            > Regards
            > --
            > Mike Leavitt ac998@l...
          • Mike Leavitt
            Hello pmcvflag ... No offense taken, in fact I thought you made a good point. Regards -- Mike Leavitt ac998@lafn.org
            Message 5 of 12 , Jul 11, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              Hello pmcvflag

              On 11-Jul-03, you wrote:

              > Oh no Mike, I hope you did not think that was in anyway meant to be
              > directed as anything other than the recognition that we do get a
              > little off topic on occasion (I have been talking about the
              > Freemasons myself).... it is natural that we will. I simply point it
              > out in case this is what has caused Mr Gavin to be confused about
              > our intended focus of the club.
              >
              >> Iagree fully with you, and as to the Freemason thread, your point
              >> is well taken, I prefaced one of my last posts with sorry for the
              >> OT, and it is time to take it to private mail or drop it.

              No offense taken, in fact I thought you made a good point.

              Regards
              --
              Mike Leavitt ac998@...
            • walkinginclogs@aol.com
              Is there a Gnostic church, or one that ascribes the closest to their beliefs in existence today?
              Message 6 of 12 , Jul 12, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                Is there a Gnostic church, or one that ascribes the closest to their beliefs
                in existence today?
              • Mike Leavitt
                Hello walkinginclogs@aol.com ... My church, the Ecclesia Gnostica in Los Angeles, and our sister church in Chicago, the Ecclesia Gnostique Apostolique. There
                Message 7 of 12 , Jul 12, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hello walkinginclogs@...

                  On 12-Jul-03, you wrote:

                  > Is there a Gnostic church, or one that ascribes the closest to their
                  > beliefs in existence today?

                  My church, the Ecclesia Gnostica in Los Angeles, and our sister church
                  in Chicago, the Ecclesia Gnostique Apostolique. There are some
                  branches of both. We are basically Valentinian in approach. Look at
                  our website http://www.gnosis.org for a large collection of gnostic
                  writings, church schedules and branches and a link to the other
                  church. Like all modern Gnostic bodies, it is an attempt at an
                  accurate reconstruction, nothing more. We have the Apostolic and
                  neo-Templar Successions, but no other historical link, except to late
                  19th century French Gnostic bodies, like the one of Papus. No-one
                  has actual gnostic successions on an historical basis, obviously.

                  Regards
                  --
                  Mike Leavitt ac998@... Sr. Priest Ecclesia Gnostica
                • walkinginclogs@aol.com
                  Thanks. I will explore the yellow pages a bit, and if find one, I will drop in for Sunday mass.
                  Message 8 of 12 , Jul 12, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Thanks. I will explore the yellow pages a bit, and if find one, I will drop
                    in for Sunday mass.
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.