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

Re: Relevance

Expand Messages
  • George Harvey
    ... details ... agreement ... continue ... Hi PMCV, If we can t agree that Gnosis is knowledge by experience then I don t see how I can proceed. If you will
    Message 1 of 46 , May 31, 2004
      --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, pmcvflag <no_reply@y...> wrote:
      > Hey George...
      >
      > >>To start with do we agree that gnosis means knowledge through
      > experience? I will use gnow and know. I can know how to get to your
      > house by having directions without ever having been there, but I can
      > only gnow how to get to your house if I have actually experienced
      > going there myself. Do we agree so far?<<
      >
      > Hmmm, well, though it is not exactly how I would put it, I believe
      > you are driving at the common Greek usage here... and it seems you
      > are heading somewhere with that so instead of worrying about
      details
      > I think that it is a fine enough place to start. Of course, the
      > specialized usage that comes from Platonism is not in exact
      agreement
      > with the general Greek, so I will step back and allow you to
      continue
      > your point.
      >
      > PMCV

      Hi PMCV,
      If we can't agree that Gnosis is knowledge by experience then I don't
      see how I can proceed.

      If you will give the specialized meaning from Platonism I'll see if
      it will fit in my explanation.

      George
    • pmcvflag
      You are so patient, Cari, but my post was so explicetly about the afterlife in Gnosticism and the lack of continuation of the self identity with the
      Message 46 of 46 , Jun 9, 2004
        You are so patient, Cari, but my post was so explicetly about
        the "afterlife" in Gnosticism and the lack of continuation of the
        self identity with the rejoining into the Source, that I don't think
        Fred really missed my point so badly as to think I was talking about
        some form of Buddhist monastic ego death. I think instead he is
        purposfully taking my words out of context to be trite (something he
        has already been reprimanded for). *sigh* He will be able to post
        again when he is ready for serious conversation.

        PMCV

        --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, lady_caritas <no_reply@y...>
        wrote:
        > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, fred60471 <no_reply@y...> wrote:
        > > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, pmcvflag <no_reply@y...>
        wrote:
        > >
        > > ... I know that this concept is very scary to a lot of
        > > people who can't deal with the notion of loss of the self ...
        > >
        > > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, pmcvflag also wrote:
        > >
        > > ... I do know ...
        > > ... I think if ...
        > > ... I have known ...
        > > ... I know that ...
        > >
        > > PMCV
        >
        >
        > Fred, I don't understand your point. I don't see PMCV as saying
        that
        > we "presently" lose our sense of self. The sentence before your
        > first quote reads, "You see, the "spirit", according to Gnostic
        > thought, is not part of what we call "us". It is not part of one's
        > personal identity, but instead it is a little reflective shard of
        the
        > source of all spirit. That is to say, it is a little piece that
        will
        > rejoin with a larger whole EVENTUALLY." [emphasis added]
        >
        > Personally, I view ego "death" as an oxymoron in this present
        > existence. We all have egos. We need a sense of self to function
        in
        > this world. That is not the same as saying that we all are
        > egotistical though.
        >
        >
        > Cari
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.