Understanding the Gnostic Heresy

[Soul_of_Shu]

We are having a hard time linking up lately

I am not saying the Gnostic traditions evolved into more mainstream Christian tradition or anything of that sort.

We are indeed not jibing, because I never said that you said anything of the sort. You said: The gnostic traditions survived in what we call "esoteric Christianity", which I took to imply an ongoing evolutionary ideation process, analogous to how dinosaurs survive in the birds of today. The bastardization called mainstream Christianity may be akin to the domesticated flightless chicken

[AshvinP]

We are having a hard time linking up lately

I am not saying the Gnostic traditions evolved into more mainstream Christian tradition or anything of that sort.

We are indeed not jibing, because I never said that you said anything of the sort. You said: The gnostic traditions survived in what we call "esoteric Christianity", which I took to imply an ongoing evolutionary ideation process, analogous to how dinosaurs survive in the birds of today. The bastardization called mainstream Christianity may be akin to the domesticated flightless chicken

Oh I see. I took your comment to mean, from my perspective, the Gnostic ideas were not fit enough to survive and therefore Reality selected for the mainstream ones instead and Gnostic ones went extinct. Yes I think we are on the same page now, especially about the flightless chickens

[Eugene I]

All good points ... Truth be told, I was never a fan of the demiurge narrative, so I might have buried that one too if I had the chance It is valid if looking at it through the lens of the evolution of ideation, to understand that just like some species, some ideas don't make the cut. But instead of thinking of it as just survival of the fittest kind, it can also be seen as metamorphosis into the imago kind, except without some notion of finality.

"Demiurge" is simply a Greek word for "Creator". Only in Gnosticism it was associated with a "malevolent" Creator. But IMO picturing the Demiurge either as omni-malevolent, or as omni-benevolent, are both naive. It is neither, and likely includes both aspects and also other aspects much beyond those two polarities.

[Ben Iscatus]

"Demiurge" is simply a Greek word for "Creator". Only in Gnosticism it was associated with a "malevolent" Creator. But IMO picturing the Demiurge either as omni-malevolent, or as omni-benevolent, are both naive. It is neither, and likely includes both aspects and also other aspects much beyond those two polarities.

Hey, Eugene! You weren't always so diplomatic and all-inclusive. Remember this?

"To me it looks more like a concentration camp or an animal farm with a full setup to keep us addicted to it and stay ignorant.

We know dictatorships happen in human society, we know that the creatures on the other side are fundamentally no different from us on this side, they have the same traits and delusions. So it is entirely possible that it is as messy there as it is here with possibilities of all sorts of abuse, dictatorships, exploitation etc.

For some reason we assume that the deities must be benevolent and all-knowing beings. But there is no reason for that, and, if we are to believe Buddha, they are far from that. They are as deluded and messed up as we are. But they got us under their spell and control, they want us to believe that they are all-knowing and benevolent and that the worlds (camps) they create for us are perfect, or not to know anything about them at all.
are not innocent computer VR games. People and animals (are they criminals too?) suffer here immensely in billions. and this world was set up and is being maintained by meta-cognitive beings/deities, as we know from NDE accounts. And as in any dictatorship, we are continuously mind-manipulated to accept it and believe that it is all organized for a good purpose, while in fact the only purpose for a dictatorship is to sustain itself."

[Eugene I]

Hey, Eugene! You weren't always so diplomatic and all-inclusive. Remember this?

"To me it looks more like a concentration camp or an animal farm with a full setup to keep us addicted to it and stay ignorant.

We know dictatorships happen in human society, we know that the creatures on the other side are fundamentally no different from us on this side, they have the same traits and delusions. So it is entirely possible that it is as messy there as it is here with possibilities of all sorts of abuse, dictatorships, exploitation etc.

For some reason we assume that the deities must be benevolent and all-knowing beings. But there is no reason for that, and, if we are to believe Buddha, they are far from that. They are as deluded and messed up as we are. But they got us under their spell and control, they want us to believe that they are all-knowing and benevolent and that the worlds (camps) they create for us are perfect, or not to know anything about them at all.
are not innocent computer VR games. People and animals (are they criminals too?) suffer here immensely in billions. and this world was set up and is being maintained by meta-cognitive beings/deities, as we know from NDE accounts. And as in any dictatorship, we are continuously mind-manipulated to accept it and believe that it is all organized for a good purpose, while in fact the only purpose for a dictatorship is to sustain itself."

Yes, I know. I'm a kind of person that prefers to stay away from religiously believing in only one version of reality and rather prefer to simultaneously keep multiple perspective on it at the same time, ether as exclusive but undecidable possibilities, or as inclusive but different facets of reality, even if these perspectives seemingly contradict each other.

It's like us people - in most cases we are partly knowledgeable and partly deluded and ignorant, partly honest and good-willed, partly manipulative and selfish. It's often tempting to categorize sentient beings in black-and-white way, and there are definitely some extreme cases when some of us could be categorized as mostly benevolent or mostly malevolent, but in most cases it's a mixed bag of both. It's quite possible that the same applies to the deities. I think Greeks understood it very well (is Zeus malevolent or benevolent?)

[AshvinP]

Hey, Eugene! You weren't always so diplomatic and all-inclusive. Remember this?

"To me it looks more like a concentration camp or an animal farm with a full setup to keep us addicted to it and stay ignorant.

We know dictatorships happen in human society, we know that the creatures on the other side are fundamentally no different from us on this side, they have the same traits and delusions. So it is entirely possible that it is as messy there as it is here with possibilities of all sorts of abuse, dictatorships, exploitation etc.

For some reason we assume that the deities must be benevolent and all-knowing beings. But there is no reason for that, and, if we are to believe Buddha, they are far from that. They are as deluded and messed up as we are. But they got us under their spell and control, they want us to believe that they are all-knowing and benevolent and that the worlds (camps) they create for us are perfect, or not to know anything about them at all.
are not innocent computer VR games. People and animals (are they criminals too?) suffer here immensely in billions. and this world was set up and is being maintained by meta-cognitive beings/deities, as we know from NDE accounts. And as in any dictatorship, we are continuously mind-manipulated to accept it and believe that it is all organized for a good purpose, while in fact the only purpose for a dictatorship is to sustain itself."

Yes, I know. I'm a kind of person that prefers to stay away from religiously believing in only one version of reality and rather prefer to simultaneously keep multiple perspective on it at the same time, ether as exclusive but undecidable possibilities, or as inclusive but different facets of reality, even if these perspectives seemingly contradict each other.

It's like us people - in most cases we are partly knowledgeable and partly deluded and ignorant, partly honest and good-willed, partly manipulative and selfish. It's often tempting to categorize sentient beings in black-and-white way, and there are definitely some extreme cases when some of us could be categorized as mostly benevolent or mostly malevolent, but in most cases it's a mixed bag of both. It's quite possible that the same applies to the deities. I think Greeks understood it very well (is Zeus malevolent or benevolent?)

Good point, Eugene. The living essences of the deities are still very much encompassed within each individual human being. Here we start to appreciate the imaginative mythology of the Greeks, as well as the astrology (and alchemy) up to the Middle Ages. That is a central theme in my latest essay on aesthetics. And we also see how the living transformations of humanity reflected in the evolution of that mythology into the dawn of Pisces and the Christian era. We must hold these image-concepts fluidly for them to really take root within us, otherwise they will just seem like mumbo jumbo. But really these connections between the individual as microcosm and the Cosmos as macrocosm are true in the most literal sense.


viewtopic.php?f=5&t=441

The sense-realms of each individual are a microcosm of the Zodiacal macrocosm. Picture man standing upright and divided into twelve sense regions with three bodily regions containing four senses each - four in the lower region including limbs (willing), four in the middle region (feeling), and four in the upper region (thinking). The constellations have remained relatively fixed through much of human history. The person who looked up to the clear night sky 2,000 years ago could discern the same stars in the same constellations as the person looking up today. We can imagine that the visible constellations of the Zodiac, in relation to our Sun's position, function just like a modern clock - they tell us what has occurred, what is occurring, or what can be expected to occur at any given time. The modern clock tells us it is time to go to work when it strikes a certain number, but it never says to us, "I have caused you to go to work by striking this number". Likewise, the visible Zodiac tells us certain qualities were present, are present, or can be expected to be present at any given Cosmic time, but it does not cause those qualities to be present.









The fixed nature of the constellations is an artifice of our now isolated and distant perspective, since the stars are, in reality, always moving in relation to one another. And the fixed nature of our senses is a microcosmic artifice in the same way. What we know truly changes what we see - whether we are looking right in front of us or out into the depths of space. Our senses are yearning to be set free from their chains by way of our inner illumination - to die and to be reborn - and aesthetics provides the fuel to keep our inner lamps burning in the darkness. This rebirth of the senses will then reveal their true essence as faculties of knowing. That is how we come to raise the senses from lifelessness back into life. Saint Paul spoke of our redemptive duty when he wrote, "we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until the present time." We do not need to stretch our imaginative thought very far to know who exactly was born from those pains of childbirth; born of the Virgin Mary; born of the death at the Cross, and given the breath of life in the Resurrection and Pentecost.
...
Our evolutionary story dawned in the age of Pisces and now it travels in the orbit of Aquarius. It is now we become farmers and gardeners tasked with revitalizing the soil of the lower senses so they yield the fruit of higher cognition. We must not forget that we are active participants in this story: writing it in our thoughts, producing it with our feelings, and directing it by our will; directing it by our imaginations, producing it with our inspirations, and writing it in our intuitions. The story has no meaning independent of these triune spiritual activities. There can be no egoism here, but only a profound sense of responsibility. We must contemplate these truths in humility, but we must also recognize our own participatory role in their unfolding. By playing that part well, we bring the twelve constellations of our senses from fixed distant galaxies into our seven moving planetary orbits. We shift from the realm of distant mythos into the realm of living spiritual drama - the realm of twelve becomes the realm of seven.

[Ben Iscatus]

It's like us people - in most cases we are partly knowledgeable and partly deluded and ignorant, partly honest and good-willed, partly manipulative and selfish. It's often tempting to categorize sentient beings in black-and-white way, and there are definitely some extreme cases when some of us could be categorized as mostly benevolent or mostly malevolent, but in most cases it's a mixed bag of both. It's quite possible that the same applies to the deities. I think Greeks understood it very well (is Zeus malevolent or benevolent?)

I think the Greek gods were entirely self-centred. I have to say, Eugene, I much preferred the definiteness and clarity of your original argument! But I understand why you have now decided to hedge your bets.

[SanteriSatama]

I think the Greek gods were entirely self-centred. I have to say, Eugene, I much preferred the definiteness and clarity of your original argument! But I understand why you have now decided to hedge your bets.

Sethian gnosticism was mainly critical of malevolence of YHWH, and seems to be rooted in anarchist-spiritual undercurrent of Judaism. Greek Pantheon retains animistic roots of natural forces and social drama, much more fun than the psychopath tribal god of Jews.

Myths are alive and evolve, I consider Tolkien's mythology-theology and of course Matrix-trilogy most important contemporary Gnostic myths. In light of those and Eugene's less black-and-white view, it seems that our long term efforts to heal a sick god are bearing fruit.

[Eugene I]

I have to say, Eugene, I much preferred the definiteness and clarity of your original argument! But I understand why you have now decided to hedge your bets.

Well, the argument still holds, and the possibility of the material and astral worlds being ruled by Archons still remains. But it's not a proof, only a suspicion and a-la-David-Icke conspiracy theory, which may or may not turn out to be true. Other possibilities still remain, and I think a safe position would be to remain cautiously and skeptically opened to them. Buddhism actually didn't go to the extreme of Gnosticism and never claimed that the rulers of Brahmaloka are malevolent, it only claimed that they are to certain extent deluded and "unenlightened", and as a consequence, prone to all flaws of the unenlightened state of consciousness. So the point in Buddhism was not to stop being fooled by the deities, but to stop fooling ourselves, because the former is just the consequence of the latter.

[Soul_of_Shu]

M@L's gnostic chorus of archons, angels and daemons, etc, singing an ode to its corporeal alter-mode expressions ...