Dialogues on the Supersensual Life
Nuvoadam
"Dialogues on the Supersensual Life." Here he sums up what for him
are the principle questions and thus quests of Gnosticism:
'The pupil spoke to the master: How can I attain the metaphysical life
so that I can see God and hear him speak.
The master answers: Raise yourself to the level on which no being
lives, then you will hear God speak.
The pupil: Is that level near or far? The master answers: It is within
you. If you can suppress your will and your senses for one hour you
will hear the indescribable words of God.
Pupil: How will I be able to hear if my will and my senses are
suppressed?
The master answers: If your personality's senses and will are silent
eternal hearing, seeing and speaking will be revealed within you. God
will hear and see you. Your own hearing, desire and seeing stops you
from seeing and hearing God.
The pupil: How shall I hear and see God if he is a supernatural being?
The master answers: If you sit quietly you are what God was before
nature and creation. And that from which he created you as a natural
being. Then you will hear and see with those faculties with which God
saw and heard in you before your own desire, seeing and hearing began
to work.
The pupil: What is stopping me from reaching that state? The master
answers: Your own desires, hearing and seeing and the fact that you
are in conflict with that from which you originated. You break away
from God's will with your own will and with your seeing you only see
what you yourself are. Your will blocks your hearing with the
obstinacy of worldly and natural things. It will bring down and
overshadow you with your desires to stop you from reaching the
supernatural and the metaphysical.'
Kater Moggin
> Jacob Böhme was a mystic and a famous gnostic who in 1641 produced the
> "Dialogues on the Supersensual Life." Here he sums up what for him
> are the principle questions and thus quests of Gnosticism:
...
> The master answers: If you sit quietly you are what God was before
> nature and creation. And that from which he created you as a natural
> being.
That ain't gnosticism. The gnostics typically distinguish
the Creator of this world from the true God, but Boehme is
equating the two, in keeping with Christian or Jewish orthodoxy.
-- Moggin
to e-mail, remove the thorn
penitent leper
wrote:
Yep, Nuvoadam continues to post his lies, fabrications, delusions,
and newage sewage. He's incapable of learning, and so full of himself
and so full of misinformed superstition that he can't keep his mouth
shut even when he's wrong - which is most of the time.
- pl -
Krag
Kater Moggin wrote in message ...
>Nuvo...@AOL.com (Nuvoadam):
>
>> Jacob Böhme was a mystic and a famous gnostic who in 1641 produced the
>> "Dialogues on the Supersensual Life." Here he sums up what for him
>> are the principle questions and thus quests of Gnosticism:
>
>...
>
>> The master answers: If you sit quietly you are what God was before
>> nature and creation. And that from which he created you as a natural
>> being.
>
Kater Moggin
> I Love Boehme
You love quietly editing out anything you'd rather not see.
To repeat:
That ain't gnosticism. The gnostics typically distinguish
the Creator of this world from the true God, but Boehme is
equating the two, in keeping with Christian or Jewish orthodoxy.
-- Moggin
to e-mail, remove the thorn
Nuvoadam
attached to the romantic quest. Walt Whitman heralded this
breakthrough in his poem "Song of Myself" wherein he states "Divine am
I inside and out, and I make holy whatever I touch or am touched
from."
At the roughly the same time his fellow Transcendentalist, Thoreau,
said that he had read a Vendantist "Hindoo Book" which afforded him
illumination into the nature of self and its relationship to the
divine. In "Walden" (pg 67) he quotes "So the Soul, from the
circumstances in which it is placed, mistakes its own character, until
the truth is revealed to it by some holy teacher, and then it knows
itself to be Brahma (God)."
"Think things out for yourself, and you will not go astray."
~~~Hermetica Corpus XI. ii fin
The Hermetics did not believe that every soul was endowed with Nous
(intelligence).
"Now the human soul -- not indeed every human soul -- but the pious
soul, is daemonic and divine And such a soul when it has run the race
of piety becomes mind (Nous) throughout. But the impious soul retains
its own substance unchanged; it suffers self-inflicted punishment, and
seeks an earthly body into which it may enter."
~~~ XII, 19
To listen to the Hermeticist talk of the fate of the self-damned is
revealing. The "vicious souls" are self-condemned to a physical
rebirth experiencing lost memory, ignorance and suffering. But the
pure soul endowed with Nous has experienced the spiritual rebirth.
Nous = mind/intelligence. Tik/Tek = to be reborn/to give birth
to/reborn. Gnos-tic thus can mean 'to become born again through
aquired knowledge), and Gnosis denotes such aquired wisdom.
The Greeks held the inner light to be intelligent, always watchful,
always truthful and usually helpful. One who had met their light was
a Daimon (intellectually born again) who would often manifest godlike
powers afterword. Through Gnosis aka Geo-Nosis they had understood
the disease apparent in the human condition (nosis) everywhere on
earth (geo) and that was ignorance (you are BLIND, Sakle).
Thereafter the aspirant aquired knowledge until the connection was
made; the mind was endowed with Super-mind, and remembers the
connection to Supra-mind. They had begun the process of Gnosis,,, for
Genesis in most of its bifurcated versions means some aspect of being
born again as God-mind manifest within earth-body (Geo). This was
Gignesthai (to be born)which we may render as Gignosthai (mind
rebirth).
To the Hermetics, the ascent of the soul at the death of the body
leads it through various heavenly zones to its consummation. "This
is the Good; for those who have got GNOSIS...", elsewhere "the Gnosis
of the things that are" (The Shepherd of Men, Corpus Hermetica). Abel
and Hare define Gnosis as "knowledge of God and the relation between
him and the true self." (Hermes Trismegistus: And Investigation of the
Origin of the Hermetic Writings).
Plutarch mentions the original Corpus Hermetica burned along with the
Library of Alexandria during the Cleopatra, Caesar and Antony wars
(around 54 BC). Plutarch, Cicero and Herodotus call Thoth as Hermes,
and Plutarch uses the word DEMIURGOS. He was also called the LOGOS.
In the Corpus, Hellenism influenced by Judaism referrenced the Book of
Genesis, although what libelli this is in I cannot recall. The
Hermetics call the Christians evil and a "deadly enemy" who were
prophecied to eventually sweep over the earth, erasing all traces of
pagonism.
Thoth/Hermes was not to be seen as the Demiurge, but as the SON (-us)
of the Demiurge, hence Demiurg-os. Cicero claims that Hermes left
Egypt and travelled the word trying to get humanity to worship one god
alone, calling this the creative (urge) Demi/deme
(half/not-quite-full/house/dwelling/governor). The word Demi was used
to signify that creation was part of God (Nous/mind), but would not
always see itself as being unified. So by forcing (deme) half (demi)
of itself into a Cosmos, the Cosmocrator seperates Self from self by
the veil of ignorance.
The Alexandrian Hermetics developed under Ptolemy a new religion being
an amalgamation of many others, particularily of Egyptian, Greek and
Jewish. The Serapis cult was actually called by its full title as the
'Serapis and Sophia' cult, if I may be so bold as to call it a cult.
Sophia was Isis was "The Mother" Mary was Demeter (De/The
Mater/Mother) was Io was Ino was Asherah was Sophia.
The Judaism influenced by Hellenism became a new branch of Jewish
Mysticism. Kabbalistic thought modified to include the
Abraxas/Abrasax figure in Adam the Kadmon (God-man), a Shiva/Shakti
like figure whose mind encompasses the entire Cosmos. Meanwhile the
Syrian School was pumping out Hellenized Jewish Gnostics by the year.
Old apocrypha was used as source material for new Gnostical writings.
Plotinus introduced the word Hypostasis and Paul or Gamaliel or
Dositheus borrowed it to write new myths based upon the old.
The book of Norea is mentioned in one text, Zoroastarian angeology in
another. Jesus and the Essenes called the Pharisaic Gnostical groups
as the "Sons of Darkness", meaning they were ignorant to their real
relationship with God.
In a later poste, I would like to explore the schizm in Qumran as
representing the two competing schools of Gnostical thought--
Alexandria and Antioch. I will also explore Jesus extent quips
towards the Pharisee camp, and how he viewed them as manipulative
deity fallen from grace. I would also like to toch once again on the
Hermetic aspect to these political machinations, because I firmly
believe that the Copts were right in the middle of the action as a
mediating influence. Like Jesus and the Great Seth, the Copts saw
both self and Self as being two aspects of one thing: Mind.
"If we could read the secret history of our enemies, we should find in
each man's life sorrowand suffering enough to disarm all hostility."
~~Henry Wadsworth Longfellow
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Krag
Kater Moggin wrote in message ...
>
>> I Love Boehme
>
> You love quietly editing out anything you'd rather not see.
>To repeat:
>
> That ain't gnosticism. The gnostics typically distinguish
>the Creator of this world from the true God, but Boehme is
>equating the two,
Krag: If by "creator of this world" you mean Satan or the Demi-urge, then
Boehme is assuredly NOT equating the two. Boehme's God is not evil,
arrogant, the son of Sophia, and did not create a pantheon of false angels.
Boehme writes that we must give up our pursuit of the senses and turn inward
"When thou standest still from the Thinking of SELF, and the Willing of
SELF; when both thy Intellect and Will are quiet and passive to the
Impressions of the Eternal Word and Spirit; when thy Soul is winged up, and
above that which is temporal with the outward Senses and the Imagination
being locked up by Holy Abstraction; then the Eternal Hearing, Seeing, and
Speaking will be revealed IN THEE; and so God heareth and seeth through
thee, being now the Organ of His Spirit; and so God speaketh in thee, and
whispereth to thy Spirit, and thy Spirit heareth his Voice. Blessed art thou
therefore if that thou canst stand still from SELF-Thinking and
SELF-Willing, and canst stop the Wheel of thy Imagination and Senses; for it
is hereby that thou mayest arrive at Length to see the great Salvation of
God, being made capable of all Manner of Divine Sensations and Heavenly
Communications. Since it is nought indeed but thine OWN Hearing and Willing
that do hinder thee, so that thou dost not see and hear God."
Kater Moggin
> If by "creator of this world" you mean Satan or the Demi-urge, then
> Boehme is assuredly NOT equating the two.
By "the Creator of this world," i mean the creator-god who
forms this universe. The gnostics characteristically
distinguish him from the true God -- but Boehme is equating the
two, as in Christian or Jewish orthodoxy.
pe...@chez.com
> Jacob Böhme was a mystic and a famous gnostic
all lies, Boehme was nothing near Gnostic,
as he denied the dualism and worshipped the evil demon Yhvh.
Klaus Schilling
Nuvoadam
Boehme understood what dualism really is: seperation of self from the
divine. And since this seperation is one of ignorance, then the task
is to search for a way to not really pierce the veil or bridge the
gap, as to realize that there is no veil or gap other than humanities
own ignorance of their own divine nature.
"It is within you." (you must meditate to find the mirror)
"Raise yourself to the level on which no being lives.." (raising up of
Nous/Spirit/Soul as mentioned in the Secret Gospel of James, the
Ascension of Isaiah, several of the Books of Enoch etc.)
"If your personality's senses and will are silent (Nirvana = Silence)
eternal hearing, seeing and speaking will be revealed within you. God
will hear and see you. Your own hearing, desire and seeing stops you
from seeing and hearing God." (Your own ignorance, ego-issues and
attachment to desire is the veil to be pierced)
"Your own desires, hearing and seeing and the fact that you are in
conflict with that from which you originated. You break away from
God's will with your own will and with your seeing you only see what
you yourself are. Your will blocks your hearing with the obstinacy of
worldly and natural things. It will bring down and overshadow you with
your desires to stop you from reaching the
supernatural and the metaphysical." (Once again, you and your
"obstinant will" are the real monster to be defeated. This is the
nature of dualism.)
Boehme might as well be a Buddhist, for the entire analogy uses
distinctly eastern terminology. He is one of the preeminant western
Gnostics. He didn't worship Yah as a singular indivudual, but as
being representative of the Totality of the All unified as many minds
in one, the same conceptualization Jesus couched the multiple-voiced
Amen within. To him Yah was not a "demon", but a unity of MIND, kind
of like pantheism on steroids.
Boehme was one of several people who were instramental in preserving
many disparate Hermetic libellii for later incorporation into the
Corpus Hermetica. He understood that for all intents and purposes,
the Hermetics were calling themselves Gnostics before the "falsely
so-called" competing Gnostical sects. He knew that the Hermtetisics
were using the words Gnostic and Gnosis in an unadulterated for,
unstained by the fear and hate driven stories being produced by the
Alexandria Schools Gnostic rival to the north: Antioch.
Note how the Antioch School has incorporated the same terminology as
the Alexandrian brothers, but would turn the Hermetic myth back on the
Copts by demonizing the Logos, the Demiurge, by thieving the words
Gnostic/Gnosis, and by generally be d*cks towards their southern
brothers. Abraxas is Alexandrian. The Great Seth is distinctly
Syrian. The Schizm is exceedingly apparent to anyone with eyes to see
it. The Hellenized Jews of the Syrian camp used Greek terminology,
phraseology ahnd ideology to rework old Genesis apocrypha into new
myths.
Boehme was representative of the Alexandrian camp and all esoterics
descended from or imeasurably influenced by this branch of the Gnostic
tree (Rosicrucians, Hermetics, Christian-Gnostic-Copts, Kingfishers,
Essene 'Sons of Light', Templor Knights, Freemasons, and many other
cognosenti and illuminati. Meanwhile, the rivals of the Alexandrian
camp were constantly being harrassed by the Church Fathers who seemed
to lose no opportunity to remind the Marcionites, Sethians,
Valentinians that they were not Gnostics.
I believe there is much evidence that the Sethians and Valentinians
incorporated TM techniques into their basic syllabus, for while the
Simonian influence all but guarennteed that there would be Syrian
schizms based upon eye-witness accounts of magi/moksha powers (the
Docetee being one example). Even the Sethians "dogs" (Essene
nickname) knew dogma when they heard it barking in their midst!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Kater Moggin
>> Boehme was nothing near Gnostic,
>> as he denied the dualism and worshipped the evil demon Yhvh.
Nuvo...@AOL.com (Nuvoadam):
> Boehme understood
Boehme may have understand any number of things. But it's
plain that his understanding differed basically from the
gnostics,' since he identified the Creator of this world as God.
The gnostics typically divide them.
> what dualism really is: seperation of self from the divine.
But Boehme viewed the Creator as divine -- to the gnostics
the Creator is not the true God. In fact he's usually
portrayed as arrogant, ignorant, evil, etc. A basic difference
in outlook.
Kater Moggin
> I believe there is much evidence ...
Doubtless Nuvoadam feels comforted by his beliefs, but the
only evidence he's offered argues against him by showing
Boemhe equates the Creator with God. Again, the characteristic
gnostic understanding divides them.
Nuvoadam
Did Jacob Boehme worship a singular being as Creator and God? Or,
like Jesus, the Buddha, Hermes, Rumi and eastern Gnosticism, did he
worship God-as-mind in all its levels and forms as existant in
everything and everyone? Those exploring Pantheism can be pulled
under at first by the quicksand of pagan stereotype, but be assured
that the concept of One-in-All-in-One is more complicated and and the
truth more sublime and awesome than any initiate can imagine! Jesus
and Mary the Magdu often referred to each other as being from 'the
One' or from 'the All', which are VERY Platonic ideals.
In fact, I would say that the very first to use the words Gnostic,
Sophia, Gnosis/etc. were the Pagan Philosophers of Greek, Latin and
Roman antiquity, and each of these first western Gnostic philosophers
(Lovers of Sophia/Wisdom) alluded to the One and to the All in
different ways. Plotinus, who seemed to have a hand in everything
around him, was influential in recreating the lost Corpus Hermetica in
a new Corpus very influenced by redacted Platonism concerning 'the
One'.
Plotinus, while not being the first, was nonetheless the most
influential author of the neo-Platonism which found its way into the
Hermetica Corpus, into the Nag Hammadi library (seemingly created by a
splinter sect of Gnostic Copts), into redacted Greek philosophy (the
Ptolemic Serapis and Sophia cult of Alexandria and Greece) and more.
Plotinus dusted off the idea of the Hypostasis, which sort of means
the descent of mind into material forms, and the ascent of mind to its
source: 'the One'.
Plotinus info:
http://www.island-of-freedom.com/PLOTINUS.HTM
Check out neoplatonism and especially Plotinus' ideas concerning
Hypostasis and the self's relationship to the One.
http://www.kheper.net/topics/Neoplatonism/Neoplatonism.htm
Todays Gnostic revival is largely based upon a resurgance of specific
sects of Gnostical thought, many of which were considered antithetical
to Church dogma. This Sectological redaction of the old has done an
end-around the many individuals labled as Gnostics or Gnostical who
have lived over the last 1600+ years up to this point. Do not let the
efforts of a select few tar the rest of the Gnostic community with
their slandor. Judge for yourself what is Gnosticism!
Jacob Boehme: facts
http://www.mythosandlogos.com/boehme.html
Here is a sight concerning Gnosis. I think you will see who the big
fish in the pond is, and I cannot encourage you enough to explore the
Logos of this Boddhisattva. First please, explore his two posts "The
Wisdom of Jacob Boehme".
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LIVING-GNOSIS-NOW/messages/201?viscount=100
Are you going to choose the path of fear?
(snip)
"But Boehme viewed the Creator as divine -- to the gnostics
the Creator is not the true God. In fact he's usually
portrayed as arrogant, ignorant, evil, etc. A basic difference
in outlook."
Or are you going to choose the path of enlightenment?
The eternal moment is all about time.
"Time is the one commodity above all that is our true possession....
Time's most important quality passes, that we have only a finite
amount. Therefore, be aware of its value and know that when you give
your time, you're giving your life."
~~~Daphne Rose Kingma
"Ours is a brand-new world of allatonceness. Time has ceased, space
has vanished. We now live in a global village."
~~~Marshall Mcluhan
Just imagine that this global village encompasses the entire Cosmsic
mind in one group-mind. This is the eternal moment. Of all the ways
to enlightenment utilized by the many Gnostic sects of east and west,
The Way to Love is the highest path. Philosophy: 'the Love of
Wisdom', but it might as well be 'the Wisdom of Love', for only
through this doorway can one enter into the highest Heaven, the
highest Nirvana, the highest Pleroma. Not a single being is lost from
the eternal moment, all are present in this eternal Now.
mind = you.
Mind = a unity of mind localized in space-time: an AEON, or eternity.
MIND = supra-mind, the unity of all pleromic group minds into one
Supra-Lotus.
not-MIND = that quantum place where are to be found the end and
beginning.
Enmity is not The Way. I forgive all and ask forgiveness from all.
"You cease to be afraid when you cease to hope, for hope is
accompanied by fear."
~~~Lucius Annaeus Seneca (1st century AD)
Lay down your hope and find the truth of the eternal ones. Stand upon
this truth. YOU are 'The Truth'. The Truth is who and what you are!
Love and forgiveness are The Way to the rest of the eternal ones. The
door never needed a key to open for it was never shut. Cease knocking
on the doors of perception and see that The Way is open for you to
return from whence (where and when) you once descended.
You are the brave soul who was lowered. You are the Lowered One and
thus YOU ARE THE LORD: ONE. You are the one who shall recieve the
light of gnosis, and shine it upon the grave of the world; for the
world is dead until recieiving life.
First you must meditate. Jesus called meditation as prayer, saying
that it was helpful to meditate in total darkness. All the easier to
find the inner light!
"When you pray, you will find rest, for you have left pain and abuse
behind. When you leave bodily pains and passions, you will recieve
rest from the Good One, and you will reign with the King, you united
with the King and the King united with you, now and for ever and ever,
Amen."
~~~Jesus: The Book of Thomas
Meditate and leave behind desire, pain of body and the abuse of the
fallen Archons controlling the world. Rise up to the highest Mind,
Supra-Nirvana, highest-Heaven, highest Pleromic Unity, the ONE, the
All-in-All, the Totality. Whatever you seek, that ye shall find.
Want to get caught up in political machinations, subterfuge and
intrigues? Go with the approach of hatred and fear. It is ok to
recognize (demonize) the fallen Archons to an extent, but it is
helpful to see them as not just potential, but absolutely future
friends and companions, in a place where all Pleromic
group-minds/Nirvana's are united as one single Lotus.
"I am the light that is over all things. I am All.
All came forth from me, and all attained to me.
Split a piece of wood, and I am there.
Pick up a stone, and you will find me there."
~~~Jesus: The Gospel of Thomas
Kater Moggin
> Did Jacob Boehme worship a singular being as Creator and God?
In the quote you gave, Boehme equates the Creator with God.
That shows his outlook differs basically from the gnostic
perspective, since the gnostics characteristically separate the
two.
Nuvoadam
The events harkened back to by the Syrian Gnostics (i.e. the creation
of Adam) took place roughly 6,000 years ago. And yet our Earth is
over 4 Billion years old, with some saying that there is evidence that
civilizations prior to humanity having lived here.
The Demiurge of Gnostic lore is a confusion between the being who
ruled over Heaven at the time of the Genesis project and the being who
created the entire Cosmos. The original Cosmocrator whom Valentinius
claimed Achamoth/Sophia was dreaming after was doing his thing long
before the Biblical Archon/Elohim.
Isn't this what Marcion was saying? That in Jesus there were
represented two saviors and in his father, two creator beings? One of
whom was a singular ruler over a Universal Empire, the other whom was
described as being something like all-encompassing MIND (the Amen: the
occulted-sun). Now which does Boehme ascribe to? He speaks to
Supra-Mind, the Unity of all lower coadunate group-minds known as
Pleroma's-- a kind of congregation of psychic minds into one
telepathic internet, centering around one source and existant in a
particular point in space-time (one of the many heavens = many
Nirvanas = many Pleromas).
Kater Moggin
> Isn't this what Marcion was saying?
Isn't that you making shit up? I notice that you've given
absolutely no evidence for your claims.
> Now which does Boehme ascribe to?
According to the quote you gave, Boehme clearly identifies
God with the Creator of this world, which means that his
outlook differs basically from the gnostics' perspective, since
gnosticism typically divides the two.
Nuvoadam
Moggin:
" Isn't that you making shit up? I notice that you've given
absolutely no evidence for your claims."
You are correct that no evidence was offered to support my claims
concerning Marcion, and at first Boehme. I substantiated Boehme's
Gnostic connection by providing some info as to his descriptions
concerning self and its relationship to the higher Self/SELF. Now
find below some Marcion info to back up my claims concerning him. I
have to admit that I find you to be such a savant that I always assume
that certain Gnostical info will be common knowledge and therefore
shift from scholarship to chit-chat. I apologize for not referencing
more and will endeavor to do so.
> Now which does Boehme ascribe to?
Moggin:
"According to the quote you gave, Boehme clearly identifies
God with the Creator of this world, which means that his
outlook differs basically from the gnostics' perspective, since
gnosticism typically divides the two."
Not really. According to the quote I gave and the links to the Boehme
info I provided, it should have been adequetely explained that for
Boehme, the creator is to be considered as all-encompassing Mind,
which means that Boehme rests upon the same logic as the Gnostics in
differentiating between GOD and gods. It's just that Boehme doesn't
debase himself by demonizing any god or being who could be considered
evil.
Hereafter are provided some observations on Marcionism snipped from a
website for a center of Marcionite research:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Ithaca/3827/
"..Marcion's claim to notoriety arose from his teaching, in which a
sharp line of distinction was drawn between the acts of the just,
severe, angry God of the Old Testament and those of the purely good,
loving, benevolent God declared by Jesus. According to Marcion, Jesus
Christ unveiled a new God, which was not the same diety of the Hebrew
scriptures. Nor was Jesus, according to Marcion, the Messiah
prophesied by the prophets of old - the Messiah to Israel, who was to
be a warrior, was still yet to come, to fulfil the national
expectations and promises of that nation. But Jesus, who entered into
this world from another universe, arrived as a universal savior, to
purchase (or,"ransom") the human race from the Old Testament God (
"the God of this world" in 2 Cor.4:4), and to provide freedom and
escape from his condemnations and wraths (i.e., those things described
in the orthodox book of Revelation)."
The Gospel of Marcion seems to be older than that of Luke and that
body of work which Luke was expanded upon. Here is an overview of
Marcion's Gospel compared to Luke:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Ithaca/3827/wait1.htm
"Marcion is said to have rejected the Old Testament entirely; not
considering it of any authority after the coming of Christ. He wrote a
work entitled "Antithesis," in which he contrasted the old system with
the new--the God of the one, with the God of the other--the law with
the gospel. He represented Christianity as a new system, abrogating
the old, and as entirely disconnected from it. The Creator of the
world described in the Old Testament, [The Demi-ourgos], was different
fromthe God of the new dispensation, and inferior to him. From the
superior God, Jesus had come, endued with divine power, commencing
with the beginning of his ministry.
"He maintained the doctrine of the impurity of matter and could not
therefore believe in the immaculate conception. According to
Tertullian,[ Adv. Marcion, 3.8. See also de Pr. C. 33, 34.] he even
denied the corporeal reality of the flesh of Christ. But this
statement may be received with some allowance."
Can we agree on this one thing at least-- that the difference between
the OT and the NT God is immense, and that the NT God was dually
represented by the two fathers of the two different Jesus. Marcion
was supposedly a disciple of Paul, and is connected with John when he
was the last of the original disciples to lead the Church. Another
intrigue is to be found in the possible source origins of Marcions
ideas.
Dositheus gave us the denial of the "corporeal reality of the flesh
of Christ", which later was called Docetism after him He first was
amazed by the concept when he tried to whack Simon the Magus with his
staff for ursurping his rule as the Standing One. Perhaps related to
another Dositheus creation in the Sadducees, the Dociteans also
absorbed into their myth the stories of Jesus rising up above the
cross, of other beings taking turns in his body during the passion,
and of other stories indicating that there had been the physical Jesus
and another astral Jesus who could come and go out of his body. To
my knowledge, it was Dositheus, Gamaliel and Paul who led the charge
on spinning out stories of the "Great Seth".
These stories could probably lead one away from the process of
enlightenment, which even the Sethians practiced, ergo their 'Baptism
of Light' rather than the Sabaean-Mandean-Persi ritualistic Tishbite
(tish-bapht = water Bapt-ist).
Once again, I quote from this center of Marcionite research:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Ithaca/3827/marcion.html
"In their effort to rebut Marcion's recognition of an independent
kingdom of evil, the Gnostics preferred to describe the evil world as
an accident or as a disturbance caused by a lack of knowledge."
Hmmm, so here are scholars of Marcionism saying that, just as the
Church opposed Marcion's heresy (splinter/schizm sectology) and
labeled him as a Gnostic, so too did the Gnostics hold that he was not
one of them due to their disagreement as to the source of evil in the
world.
Marcion played the blame game and pinned it all on the OT God and his
angels, a belief which accords well with all the heresy being produced
by the Hellenized Jews of the Syrian Gnostic community. Remember
despite its stigma, heresy is not to be considered something bad, just
something different to orthodoxy (latin: catholic?). To the real
Gnostics, Marcion was in error because he did not see that his own
"lack of knowledge" was a contributing factor to the ongoing source of
evil in the world.
In India we need only look at the many competing sects who demonize
Brahma as the ignorant creator deity, when in reality within the
religion itself each aspirant is encouraged to see themselves as an
ignorant Brahma (plural = Brahmen). Until the aspirant find the
Vishnu light within themselves, Plato would say they live in a dark
cave, struggling to find the little spark of light signifying The Way
out. Lao Tzu would call this path towards the light as "The Way",
saying that the original teachings of The Way can be historically
traced to before the first Chinese Dynasty around 1750 BCE.
When Siddhartha becomes united with Buddha-mind and preaches about
"The Way", and Jesus becomes united with Christ-mind and teaches about
"The Way", what are we to think of the mutualities of their message?
When one has knowledge-turning-to-gnosis, they know about the nature
of Plato's dark cave and the dark abyss Brahma floated within. When
one has the Gnosis of Truth, they have peeked through that keyhole to
see the other side.
The difference between us is not insurmountable Moggs. I respect you
and your knowledge and wish to find some common ground. Can we start
by agreeing as to the two creator-god concept that Marcion was famous
for helping introduce? I have always accepted that there were
controlling beings, call them Archons or Elohim or (___). They
control the cave we wish to get out of. But their primary function
seems to be to guard the Gates of Gnosis, keeping those with
ego-issues from rising up through The Way.
I have never denied that there was a creator God ruling during the
time of what I call the Genesis project whom might be seen as
overbearing and manipulative, especially when the seeker only has a
smattering of facts concerning this period of human history. For the
past 20 years I have fancied myself a student of this very history and
am sitting on many manuscripts just tearing the Demiurge a new
*sshole. But that was then, and now in having compassion for all, the
history has become transparent, shining light on the situational
politics, the frailty and weaknesses of these Elohimic/Archonic
creator beings.
Like the original Gnostics, I do not blame any other being for the
state of my own ignorance. To qualify this I must add that, like the
original Gnostics, I at least have gnosis of The Way out of ignorance,
and after this, whom does one have to blame for their suffering except
themselves?
"How lamentable it is that men blame the gods for their troubles, when
their own wickedness brings them suffering over and above that which
Destiny decrees for them."
~~~Zeus in the Odyssey
Like the Gnostics, I do not see gods as being representative of the
Supreme God. I see them as beings who, in gnosis of their own
relationship to the ONE, have obtained Moksha/Magi powers (the ability
to manipulate time and space) to become Kadmen: God in Man. As the
Kadmon they are Adam + Atman-- self united with highest Self.
Therefore to me, those who seek unity of ONE will naturally begin
manifesting Moksha powers at a certain point. This is one of the
hallmarks of being a real Gnostic who almost continually experiences
the connection with ONE, as opposed to the initiate who is still
seeking understanding.
Siddhartha often exhorted his disciples to become 'better than the
gods' by not limiting themselves to Moksha. Like many of the
Gnostics, he spoke of levels of understanding concerning mind and
self. Guatama spoke of many Nirvana's a concept which today confuses
the Buddhist fundamentalist who can only picture Supra-Nirvana as the
ultimate reality. Where Marcion spoke of multiple Universes, and Paul
of multiple Heavens, and Gamaliel+Dositheus of multiple Pleroma's, the
Buddha said that each Nirvana was ruled by a Demiurg-ic creator being;
he endeavored to remind all Nirvana's that there was a highest-Nirvana
to be attained to.
This, I believe, is the supreme Gnostic tenet. The real purpose of
Gnosticism is not to parrot a millenia-old diatribe against or for any
one Archon.
"I am from the One-who-is-whole, I was granted my Father's estate..."
"...For this reason I say: one who is whole will be filled with light,
abut one who is fragmented will be filled with darkness."
~~~Jesus: The Gospel of Thomas
Fomenting and fostering hatred or fear is dis-ease and
counterproductive to the real purpose of Gnosticism, which is to allow
for a discourse on attainment of Highest Mind: the unity of ONE. To
give rise to Ascended Masters, who hopefully will turn back and help
humanity end its suffering.
"We always revolve around the One, but we do not always pay attention
to it. Like a chorus singing harmoniously around its conductor
becomes discordant when it turns away from him, but sings beautifully
when turned inward and fully attentive -- we similarily revolve around
the Oneness of God, but do not always look to him.
"Yet when we do, we find our home and resting place. Around him we
dance the true dance; God-inspired and no longer dissonent."
~~~Plotinus
"Common people retreat from the world to country houses, the seashore
or the mountains, but it is always in your power to retreat into
yourself. Give yourself to their retreat; renew and cleanse your soul
completely."
~~~Marcus Aurelius
"Seek a place of rest for yourselves, that you may not become a
carcass and be eaten."
~~~Jesus: The Gospel of Thomas
"You are a soul carrying about a corpse."
~~~Epictetus
So what is soul if not somehow a piece of mind seeking peace of Mind
(re-union with the Divine source)?
"Even if you travel everywhere you will not find the limits of the
soul, so great is its nature."
~~~Heraclitus
"Although there is ONE Consciousness that is common to all, people act
as if they had a consciousness of their own."
~~~Heraclitus
"The soul is a small portion of God."
~~~Diogenes
In accepting the echo of Hypstasis, I would also add that, while being
born from Supra-mind, while wrapped in the veil of ignorance the
ego-mind takes on a persona of its own which naturally seeks
immortality. This seperation of the One into the All is then to be
seen as a differentiation, which Pantheism schizms into many levels of
awareness of self, Self, SELF and not-SELF.
"You are a fragment torn from God. You have a portion of Him within
you."
~~~Epictetus
"We should think of the most authoritative part of the soul as a
guardian spirit given by God that lifts us to our heavenly home."
~~~Plato
And when we return to One we will be in communion with every being who
ever lived in any point of time or space. Sic, ONE. This includes
any being ever praised or demonized as a creative force in human
history. This includes any being ever praised or scapegoated as a
Devil figure in human history. This is the eternal moment.
"Who lives with the gods? Those who are always satisfied with what has
been assigned for them and who obey the promptings of their Genius; a
portion of Himself that God has given to every human being to be their
guide and guardian, their intelligence and understanding."
~~~Marcus Aurelius
"Man as he now is has ceased to be the All. But when he ceases to be
a seperate individual, he raises himself again and permeates the
universe."
~~~Plotinus
Geonosis is a disease (nosis) within all of humanity throughout the
Earth (Geo), in this case the disease is our ignorance of the divine.
The solution is to become, as Jesus advocated: 'Born again'. To the
Greeks this word was Genius.
Geonosis is the son/daughter of (is) the descent of Nous/Sophia (nos)
into matter (Geo). This is Plotinus' Hypostasis which the Gnostics
of his era were teaching-- the descent and return of mind (Nous) into
matter (Abyth/Abyss).
Genius is a form of Genesis: to be born again. This is to be a
tic/tec (to be reborn) Nous, or Nous-tic (a mind born again through
return to source).
Our ignorance is duality.
Know-ledge is the accumulation together (latch/letch) of data. Dia
(to determine, to go through) gnosis, or Diagnosis is defined as a
judgement or assessment of a situation, in this case humanities
disease of ignorance (geonosis), until the facts become transparent
and determinism leads to understanding or action. So Dia-gnosis is
the Dia (assessment) of knowledge (accumulated data) until Gnosis (a
path towards solution being determined and walked, wisdom is found).
This, in part, is Gnosis.
If the Sethians placed the original source of the disease on a
particular being, it still did not preclude that something must be
done about it. And thus, is is interesting to note where they speak
of the Baptism of Light to be attained. My question is, if they
taught/teach their initiates to hate Yaldabaoth, or be fearful of him,
or uncomforatable in any way, then this belief will manifest as more
duality won't it?
"Let one therefore keep the mind pure, for what a man thinks that he
becomes: this is the mystery of Eternity."
~~~Maitri Upanishad
When Jesus or the Great Seth speaks of the highest Heaven, it is
always in the context of being a form of MIND, especially for me in
the Secret Book of John.
"The Perfect One is majestic; it is purely and immeasurably great. It
is the World that gives a world, the Life that gives Life, the
Blessed One that gives blessedness, the Knowledge that gives
knowledge, the Good One that gives mercy and redemption, the Grace
that gives grace.
"Not that it is actually like this. Rather, it gives immeasurable and
incomprehensible light. What shall I tell you about it? Its eternal
realm is imperishable: It is quiet, it is silent, it is at rest, and
it is before everything. It is the head of all the worlds, and it
sustains them through its goodness."
~~~Jesus: The Secret Book of John
Who are we to chastize an eld-god? Do we even know what a god is?
"Human beings think of the gods as having been born, wearing clothes,
speaking, and having bodies like their own. Ethiopians say the gods
are black with snub-noses. Thracians say they have blue eyes and red
hair. If cows and horses had hands they would draw pictures of the
gods looking like cows and horses!"
~~~Xenophanes
We don't know what the hell happened back then, it is all speculation.
Let us work out our own disease of ignorance before using speculative
myth of dubious historicity to instill disease in another. Such talk
is an affectation, a contrivance once used to spur the initiate on to
become enlightened sooner rather than later. It is all so much easier
when we have a Devil figure to scapegoat all of our sins upon. I've
never said that this methodology didn't work to spur on the initiate
towards degrees of attainment, just that fear/disease will ultimately
prove to become part of the encumbering anchor of ego.
"Human opinions are toys for children."
"The wise exchange all things for One thing; but most people are like
full-fed cattle."
"The One is all things. All things are One."
"The One is willing and reluctant to be called **God** "
~~~Heraclitus
Duality? It is just the ignorance of our true self, and our
relationship to the One.
"God is the unity of Oneness in which I dwelt myself before I was
snatched away by the conflict of opposites and born into a world of
plurality organized by strife."
~~~Emedocles
"Life is a battlefield. You are a stranger sojourning in a foreign
land. After fame comes oblivion. What is there that can support a
human being? One thing only-- philosophy."
~~~Marcus Aurelius
"Pure philosophy is spiritual striving through cosntant conemplation,
to attain True Knowledge of the One-God."
~~~Hermes Trismegistus
"Appearances are a glimpse of what is hidden."
~~~Anaxagoras
"Do not inflict others with anything that you yourself would not wish
to suffer. If you would not like to be a slave, make sure no one is
your slave. If you have slaves, you yourself are the greatest slave,
for just as freedom is incompatible with slavery, so goodness is
incompatible with hypocrisy."
~~~Epictetus
"Small minded people blame others. Average people blame themselves.
The wise see all blame as foolishness."
~~~Epictetus
"The highest of our initiations in this world is only a dream of the
true vision and initiation of death. The Mysteries have been
carefully concieved to awaken memories of the sublime things to come."
~~~Plutarch
The drive towards Gnosis shouldn't be despair concerning slavery to
another, for such emotion is reflected in our path to all who we
interact with. Instead, the drive towards Gnosis while rooted in
knowledge of the disease of ego-ignorance, should be driven by the
desire to return to the Unity, Harmony and Peace of the One.
Jesus spurred his disciples on to find life and through this, to enter
"the Kingdom" before they died.
""I tell you the truth: whoever recieves life and believes in the
kingdom will never leave the kingdom, not even if the Father wishes to
cast such a person out."
~~~Jesus: The Secret Book of James
(do not say the kingdom is here or there,) "..Rather, the kingdom is
inside of you and outside of you. When you know yourselves, then you
will be known, and will understand that you are children of the Living
Father."
~~~Jesus: The Gospel of Thomas
There were two schools of thought concerning breaking the chains of
duality. The one espoused by Jesus and the Buddha would spur on the
initiate to attain highest Pleroma/Nirvana/Heaven right away. The
other allowed the initiate to wait until the moment of death, casting
fate to the powers that be. Even so, this Stoical practice held forth
the precondition that the dying one be in in the proper state of mind.
"At the moment of death the soul must be as it is during the
Mysteries: free from any blemish, passion, envy, or anger."
~~~Porphyry
Chancy, but at least its a course of action. Whether one is talking
about the ego-death and the metaphysical (beyond physics) re-birth of
mind, or whether one is talking about such chancy stoical gambits, I
am always interested in method and those who dare to know more.
"The best life is spent preparing for death."
~~~Plato
Kater Moggin
> You are correct that no evidence was offered to support my claims
> concerning Marcion, and at first Boehme.
Twice-wrong: that ain't what I said, and it also ain't so.
You've completely failed to back up your claims about the
gnostics, Marcion included, but you began by giving a quotation
from Boehme where he equates the Creator of this world with
God, in distinction from the gnostics, who typically divide the
two.
Moggin:
>> According to the quote you gave, Boehme clearly identifies
>> God with the Creator of this world, which means that his
>> outlook differs basically from the gnostics' perspective, since
>> gnosticism typically divides the two."
Novoadam:
> Not really.
For sure. You quoted Boehme like so: "The master answers:
If you sit quietly you are what God was before nature and
creation. And that from which he created you as a natural being."
There you are: Boehme clearly equates the Creator of this
world with God, which is contrary to the characteristic gnostic
view, where the two are divided.
> Hereafter are provided some observations on Marcionism snipped from a
> website
Not even half good enough. You need to give evidence from
the sources supporting the particular claims you offered --
not just some random "observations" you happened to find on the
web.
Nuvoadam
> Nuvo...@AOL.com (Nuvoadam):
>
> > You are correct that no evidence was offered to support my claims
> > concerning Marcion, and at first Boehme.
>
> Twice-wrong: that ain't what I said, and it also ain't so.
> You've completely failed to back up your claims about the
> gnostics, Marcion included, but you began by giving a quotation
> from Boehme where he equates the Creator of this world with
> God, in distinction from the gnostics, who typically divide the
> two.
Or not. The Syrian Gnostics had an understanding that the Demiurge
and Logos of the Alexandrian School was to be slandored for having the
audacity to actually create monkeymen like yourself. (How dare they
anyway?) Boehme speaks about God the creator of the Cosmos as being
Mind. The Syrian Gnostics speak of the ruler at the time of Adam's
creation as being in error concerning his statements that he was the
highest authority. In creating this Universe we are harking back 14
to 18 billion years. In creating this earth we hark back to 4.5
billion years. Adam was engineered around 4,000 BC. That is a big
difference in time isn't it? The quote I gave from Boehme in no way
refers to your the Demiurge you hate so much. How in the heck did you
get that in the first place? If you even SEE the word "creator" you
hit your hot-button dontcha?
Look at the quote again please.
"The master answers: If you sit quietly you are what God was before
nature and
creation. And that from which he created you as a natural being."
Moggin:
> There you are: Boehme clearly equates the Creator of this
> world with God, which is contrary to the characteristic gnostic
> view, where the two are divided.
There you are. Boehme clearly does NOT equate God as the Demiurge who
was instramental in creating Adam. Ever really think over the opening
statements of Genesis? Was the earth being created from scratch, or
was it re-emerging after a great period of catacylsmic chaos? Might
be important when making distinctions concerning the history of
Demiurge myth.
> > Hereafter are provided some observations on Marcionism snipped from a
> > website
Yah? You mean the Center for Marcionite research? THAT is not good
enough for you? Will you now strictly limit your own quotes to source
documents and never again quote anothers summation of said source
documents, or are you somehow indemnified against your own hypocrisy?
You seem to have an immense interest in telling others exactly how you
wish them to make a post; it is getting to the point where the word
anal-retentive springs to mind whenever you sound off like this.
> Not even half good enough. You need to give evidence from
> the sources supporting the particular claims you offered --
> not just some random "observations" you happened to find on the
> web.
Well heck, if I can't reference some folks who have built up a
self-expertise on Marcion over many years, than I guess I better stop
refering people to your own work Puss, since you tar your own
reputation with the same brush you wave at others. Note that among
these "random observations" there were indeed Marcion quotes which the
Marcion researchers expanded upon, not unlike yourself when expanding
upon your extremely limited understanding of what and what is not
Gnosticism.
Kater Moggin
> ... The quote I gave from Boehme in no way
> refers to your the Demiurge you hate so much.
In the quote that you gave, Boehme is clearly equating the
Creator of this world with God, in contrast to the
characteristic gnostic view which divides the two, reducing the
Creator to a crappy demiurge.
Moggin:
>> You quoted Boehme like so: "The master answers:
>> If you sit quietly you are what God was before nature and
>> creation. And that from which he created you as a natural being."
>> There you are: Boehme clearly equates the Creator of this
>> world with God, which is contrary to the characteristic gnostic
>> view, where the two are divided.
Nuvoadam:
> There you are.
Agreed. In your quote, Boehme equates the Creator of this
world with God, contrary to the characteristic gnostic
perspective, in which the Creator is just a crappy demiurge and
the true God is someone else again.
> THAT is not good enough for you?
> Hereafter are provided some observations on Marcionism snipped from a
> website
Ain't half good enough. To support your claims, you would
need to give relevant evidence from the sources, not merely
some random "observations" that you happened to find on the web.
> Will you now strictly limit your own quotes to source
> documents and never again quote anothers summation of said source
> documents, or are you somehow indemnified against your own hypocrisy?
I never even suggested that you had to confine yourself to
quotes from the sources. I pointed out you offered some
random "observations" you found on the web rather than evidence
for your particular claims.
> You seem to have an immense interest in telling others exactly how you
> wish them to make a post
If you want to continue with your standard nattering, then
go right ahead. I'm simply noting that as usual you've
totally failed to offer any evidence backing up your assertions.
> it is getting to the point where the word
> anal-retentive springs to mind whenever you sound off like this.
It's revealing you reply with insults rather than evidence.
> Well heck, if I can't reference some folks who have built up a
> self-expertise on Marcion over many years
You can refer to whoever or whatever you like. But random
quotes from the web aren't any substitute for evidence
supporting your claims. Funny how such a simple idea continues
to elude you.
> than I guess I better stop
> refering people to your own work Puss, since you tar your own
> reputation with the same brush you wave at others.
The only reputation tarred here is yours, and you're doing
that job with very little help.
> Note that among
> these "random observations" there were indeed Marcion quotes which the
> Marcion researchers expanded upon
I notice you're full of crap, just like usual. There were
no "Marcion quotes" in the material you pasted in. (No
surprise, since practically none of Marcion's work still exists
today.) There were also no quotes from the extant source
materials -- merely a couple of cites on M's docetism, which is
not in dispute.
Krag
Kater Moggin wrote in message ...
>
>> ... The quote I gave from Boehme in no way
>> refers to your the Demiurge you hate so much.
>
> In the quote that you gave, Boehme is clearly equating the
>Creator of this world with God, in contrast to the
>characteristic gnostic view which divides the two, reducing the
>Creator to a crappy demiurge.
>
>Moggin:
>
>>> You quoted Boehme like so: "The master answers:
>>> If you sit quietly you are what God was before nature and
>>> creation. And that from which he created you as a natural being."
Krag: this quote would seem to suggest that God created one from
silence/nothingness and that the true nature of even the natural being is
silence/nothingness, since that was what God created the natural being from.
Before God created anything he was not a creator.....and this is the
condition that Boehme states is the nature of the created natural being --
So the natural being is uncreated (that's what the quote says, right?).
Maybe Boehme's saying when you 'sit quietly' (I'm always interupted) you
cease to exist or that you're infinite. If creation 'limits' God by putting
forms and limits in an otherwise infinite space, then I'd say this
interpretation is correct.
Q: Does the demi-urge create after a pattern or on some pre-existent
material?
Here Boehme says that such pre-existent material didn't exist --- because
this was *before* the creation of anything. In any case, Boehme's God is way
too exalted and transcendent to be a 'crappy demi-urge'. The demi-urge thing
isn't the defining characteristic of gnosticism, either, since Hermetic
Gnosticism has a creator God who is the Demi-urge. The defining
characteristic of gnosticism is its lack of dualism and view that the world
is an illusion.
Krag
Krag wrote in message ...
Correction: meant to say, God as such IS the demi-urge/creator in hermetic
gnosis
Kater Moggin
[to Nuvoadam]
>> You quoted Boehme like so: "The master answers:
>> If you sit quietly you are what God was before nature and
>> creation. And that from which he created you as a natural being."
>> There you are: Boehme clearly equates the Creator of this
>> world with God, which is contrary to the characteristic gnostic
>> view, where the two are divided.
Krag <scor...@ihug.co.nz>:
> this quote would seem to suggest ...
Nevermind seems and suggestions. It shows plainly that to
Boehme, the Creator of this world is God: an idea fully
consistent with Christian and Jewish orthodoxy, but contrary to
the characteristic gnostic view.
Krag
Kater Moggin wrote in message ...
Krag: The quote says that Boehme's God is no different to the true God of
the gnostics...ie He/she/it creates from nothingness/silence or from his own
essence, since that's all there is. You should read the quote again and this
time actually concentrate on what you're reading.
Kater Moggin
[to Nuvoadam]
>> You quoted Boehme like so: "The master answers:
>> If you sit quietly you are what God was before nature and
>> creation. And that from which he created you as a natural being."
>> There you are: Boehme clearly equates the Creator of this
>> world with God, which is contrary to the characteristic gnostic
>> view, where the two are divided.
[...]
Krag <scor...@ihug.co.nz>:
> The quote says that Boehme's God is no different to the true God of
> the gnostics.
On the contrary: the quote plainly distinguishes Boehme's
God from the God of the gnostics, since it shows Boehme
identifies God as the Creator of this world, while the gnostics
characteristically divide the two.