Guest guest Posted September 12, 2003 Report Share Posted September 12, 2003 I don't think the Gnostics were influenced by the Vedic teachings. More like the Zorastrians. My understanding of the Gnostic teachings is thus: In the beginning God set in motion the play of creation. The Logos, his Son was the firstborn. Now the Son was qualitatively the same as the Father. However, He differed in terms of intensity. Qualitatively he was an exact copy, but smaller and less intense. Now God was intending on creating a perfect world. He pulled the Son out from Himself. From the Son/Logos four beings then emerged as God began to unfold his creation. This was seen as a linear process: from God, the Son, from the Son four angelic powers, from these powers other beings and so on and so forth right down in a perfect and divine process. However, one of the Demiurges had a thought and wondered what it would be like to create. And then without God's approval then proceeded to do just that. This caused and instant rift in the whole process and the Demiurge and what it had created were immediately expelled/aborted from the Plethora. Unfortunately 144,000 shards of light were pulled out along with it. What we think of creation, matter and the physical world are really this aborted material. Totally irredeamable, corrupt and carnal. Unfortunately, the 144,000 shards have to be rescued before this abortion can be destroyed or else they will be destroyed along with it. And so Christ didn't die on the cross to save humanity, the majority who really had no soul, according to this teaching, and were simply abominal formations of this aborted material. Christ was seen as the Lord of Light who had come to awaken the final shards to their true nature, so he was also seen as the Great Illuminator. But he had no interest in saving this world and ushering in a thousand-year reign. All of heaven was awaiting His completion of his task so that this aborted rupture could finally be destroyed and the process started over and done correctly. Shades of the old Zorastrian final showdown between the forces of light and the forces of darkness. Something that filtered down into all middle-eastern religions in some form or another, but fortunately had little effect on the Vedi teachings of oneness such as the Divine formulas - 'tat tvam asi' : This Thou Art. And 'Atman = Brahman'. Personally, I much prefer to see the world as the physical embodiment of the Mother and not some hideous abortion that has no right to exist. bb rb - Mary Ann Thursday, September 11, 2003 10:23 PM Akka -Re: How does one best address a goddess? Hi Eric: How beautiful, the goddess is in you! Your post made me want to post the following: She is not beyond your eyes and skin. The woman is you as much as the man is you. It is wonderful that you revere the divine feminine/female and honor women, but do not only project that outside yourself. She lives in every man. Love her there, too, in the same way you are learning to love her through her visits to you. Is loving the woman loving the man? Is loving the man loving the woman? Why and/or why not? Why do we love women and men differently? I came across this in the book The Gnostic Gospels by Elaine Pagels and wanted to post it awhile back, but now seems like a good opportunity: "...the companion of the [savior is] Mary Magdelene. [but Christ loved] her more than [all] the disciples, and used to kiss her [often] on her [mouth]. The rest of [the discipled were offended]... They said to him, "Why do you love her more than all of us?" The Savor answered and said to them, "Why do I not love you as (I love) her?" -- Gospel of Phillip For religious fundamentalists, the answer might be because such love would be an abomination! But I feel the question articulated by Jesus in the quoted passage is profound and enlightening. I welcome more discussion on this topic. The Gnostic Gospels book is based on Pagels' research into texts that were discovered in an earthenware jar at Nag Hammadi in Upper Egypt by Muhammud Ali al-Samman, an Arab peasant, in 1945. These gospels are claimed to be books that were rejected from the official Christian teachings because they support an inner relationship with the divine rather than an external one, with its hierarchy of domination, as traditional Christianity came to be. It is said that these books are influenced by Eastern philosophies. Love, Mary Ann , "Eric Otto" <mkultra@f...> wrote: > a goddess shows up in my dreams and visions from time to time. > The first times I "handled" it but now I realize that I didn't address > her with reverence, veneration or awe that I should have. I'm also > understanding that as a man I need to address all women and feminine > creatures with greater respect. There is a bigger view coming > about that it is not clear yet involving all of the feminine, i.e., > the world beyond my skin and eyes. > > It's a bit new to me living and growing up in an environment where > women there did not have a lot of respect for themselves or with the > men in their lives. Seemed that I grew up with a lot of sad or angry > women. There is a lot discussion about equity between the sexes but > what I find is power issues and who has it in the relationship. If > I'm understanding it correctly, it is through the woman that a man > might find enlightenment. To be in relationship, then the man has to > be a respector of persons in a careful caring way. > > I am addressing women as ma'am here now just for practice and > realizing that such addressing of women is to change my perceptions, > too. But the goddess shows up in dreams and glimpses here and there, > and one needs to address her respectfully. One needs to address the > feminine just as respectfully as if a meditation. > > I'm probably rambling here. Thanks. > > Eric > > > > > > > > > > > > , akka_108 <akka_108> wrote: > > I think you can address avery goddess as mother (Ma, Mata, Mataji, > Amma). > > Is that what you mean, or did I misunderstand you? > > > > Eric Otto <mkultra@f...> wrote: > > Hi all - > > > > Obvioius question: how does one best address a goddess? How does > > one best relate to one from the perspect of a male? > > > > Thank you. > > > > Eric Otto > > > > > > Sponsor > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > > > > > > SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software > > > > Sponsor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 12, 2003 Report Share Posted September 12, 2003 Thank you for the further information on Gnosticism. Yes, aborted shards are not something to aspire to! I think Pagels' focus in her book is on the Inner Knowing vs. accepting what They say from On High angle she researched. She did say some things about certain Gnostic teachings that did not impress me about Gnosticism. She also said that the Gnostic teacher, Silvanus, encouraged his followers to resist unconsciousness as follows: "...end the sleep which weighs heavy upon you. Depart from the oblivion which fills you with darkness...Why do you pursue darkness, though the light is available for you? ...Wisdom calls you, yet you desire foolishness...a foolish man...goes the ways of the desire of every passion. He swims in the desires of life and has foundered. ...he is like a ship which the wind tosses to and fro.... ...before everything else...know yourself." This is a far cry from the blind obedience called "faith" of the orthodox or more traditional Christians. I also read a passage where it is acknowledged that attempting to live life from this way of knowing yourself first means experiencing inner turmoil. I have found this to be true, in my own life experiences. And that inner turmoil is part of the process, not a weakness brought on by lack of faith, but part of the process of the work of lighting the lamp within, despite the pressures from outside to believe in the Word from On High. -- Mary Ann , "redbreast" <the_redbreasted_one> wrote: > I don't think the Gnostics were influenced by the Vedic teachings. More like the Zorastrians. My understanding of the Gnostic teachings is thus: > > In the beginning God set in motion the play of creation. The Logos, his Son was the firstborn. Now the Son was qualitatively the same as the Father. However, He differed in terms of intensity. Qualitatively he was an exact copy, but smaller and less intense. > > Now God was intending on creating a perfect world. He pulled the Son out from Himself. From the Son/Logos four beings then emerged as God began to unfold his creation. This was seen as a linear process: from God, the Son, from the Son four angelic powers, from these powers other beings and so on and so forth right down in a perfect and divine process. > > However, one of the Demiurges had a thought and wondered what it would be like to create. And then without God's approval then proceeded to do just that. This caused and instant rift in the whole process and the Demiurge and what it had created were immediately expelled/aborted from the Plethora. > > Unfortunately 144,000 shards of light were pulled out along with it. What we think of creation, matter and the physical world are really this aborted material. Totally irredeamable, corrupt and carnal. > > Unfortunately, the 144,000 shards have to be rescued before this abortion can be destroyed or else they will be destroyed along with it. And so Christ didn't die on the cross to save humanity, the majority who really had no soul, according to this teaching, and were simply abominal formations of this aborted material. > > Christ was seen as the Lord of Light who had come to awaken the final shards to their true nature, so he was also seen as the Great Illuminator. But he had no interest in saving this world and ushering in a thousand-year reign. > > All of heaven was awaiting His completion of his task so that this aborted rupture could finally be destroyed and the process started over and done correctly. Shades of the old Zorastrian final showdown between the forces of light and the forces of darkness. Something that filtered down into all middle-eastern religions in some form or another, but fortunately had little effect on the Vedi teachings of oneness such as the Divine formulas - 'tat tvam asi' : This Thou Art. And 'Atman = Brahman'. > > Personally, I much prefer to see the world as the physical embodiment of the Mother and not some hideous abortion that has no right to exist. > > bb > rb > > > > - > Mary Ann > > Thursday, September 11, 2003 10:23 PM > Akka -Re: How does one best address a goddess? > > > Hi Eric: How beautiful, the goddess is in you! Your post made > me want to post the following: She is not beyond your eyes and > skin. The woman is you as much as the man is you. It is > wonderful that you revere the divine feminine/female and honor > women, but do not only project that outside yourself. She lives in > every man. Love her there, too, in the same way you are learning > to love her through her visits to you. Is loving the woman loving > the man? Is loving the man loving the woman? Why and/or why > not? Why do we love women and men differently? > > I came across this in the book The Gnostic Gospels by Elaine > Pagels and wanted to post it awhile back, but now seems like a > good opportunity: > > "...the companion of the [savior is] Mary Magdelene. [but Christ > loved] her more than [all] the disciples, and used to kiss her > [often] on her [mouth]. The rest of [the discipled were offended]... > They said to him, "Why do you love her more than all of us?" The > Savor answered and said to them, "Why do I not love you as (I > love) her?" -- Gospel of Phillip > > For religious fundamentalists, the answer might be because > such love would be an abomination! But I feel the question > articulated by Jesus in the quoted passage is profound and > enlightening. I welcome more discussion on this topic. > > The Gnostic Gospels book is based on Pagels' research into > texts that were discovered in an earthenware jar at Nag > Hammadi in Upper Egypt by Muhammud Ali al-Samman, an > Arab peasant, in 1945. These gospels are claimed to be books > that were rejected from the official Christian teachings because > they support an inner relationship with the divine rather than an > external one, with its hierarchy of domination, as traditional > Christianity came to be. It is said that these books are > influenced by Eastern philosophies. > > Love, > Mary Ann > > , "Eric Otto" > <mkultra@f...> wrote: > > a goddess shows up in my dreams and visions from time to > time. > > The first times I "handled" it but now I realize that I didn't > address > > her with reverence, veneration or awe that I should have. I'm > also > > understanding that as a man I need to address all women and > feminine > > creatures with greater respect. There is a bigger view coming > > about that it is not clear yet involving all of the feminine, i.e., > > the world beyond my skin and eyes. > > > > It's a bit new to me living and growing up in an environment > where > > women there did not have a lot of respect for themselves or > with the > > men in their lives. Seemed that I grew up with a lot of sad or > angry > > women. There is a lot discussion about equity between the > sexes but > > what I find is power issues and who has it in the relationship. > If > > I'm understanding it correctly, it is through the woman that a > man > > might find enlightenment. To be in relationship, then the man > has to > > be a respector of persons in a careful caring way. > > > > I am addressing women as ma'am here now just for practice > and > > realizing that such addressing of women is to change my > perceptions, > > too. But the goddess shows up in dreams and glimpses here > and there, > > and one needs to address her respectfully. One needs to > address the > > feminine just as respectfully as if a meditation. > > > > I'm probably rambling here. Thanks. > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , akka_108 > <akka_108> wrote: > > > I think you can address avery goddess as mother (Ma, Mata, > Mataji, > > Amma). > > > Is that what you mean, or did I misunderstand you? > > > > > > Eric Otto <mkultra@f...> wrote: > > > Hi all - > > > > > > Obvioius question: how does one best address a goddess? > How does > > > one best relate to one from the perspect of a male? > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > Eric Otto > > > > > > > > > Sponsor > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design > software > > > > > > > > > Sponsor > > > > > > > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 12, 2003 Report Share Posted September 12, 2003 Greetings, Plethora? Or "pleroma." I was just wondering what the textual source is that you base your interpetation on. I'm not saying I disagree with your interpretation, it's just that gnostic texts are so complicated and, in many cases, we only have bits and pieces of them. There are many, many interpretations of gnostic texts and disagreements about what they mean. There is even the question of who exactly Zoraster was and huge discrepencies in the way scholars date his life. And is it Zoraster, also know as Zarathustra? Or is it the "Christian Gnostic," Zostrianos? (see below). Either way, it is most definitely uncertain whether he even lived during the time of Christ and the apostles. Given that the gnostic gosepls themselves supposedly contain teachings of Christ (Dialogue of the Savior), unless Zoraster was present we run into the same problem that we have with the canon--misinterpretations, mistranslations and alot of missing pieces. I think it's difficult to compare the two based on these circumstances. This website is very good if anyone is interesting in exploring the Nag Hammadi. http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhlalpha.html By Gilles C.H. Nullens: Little is known of Zoroaster's life. Some scholars believe he lived between 1400 and 1000 B.C. in what is now northeastern Iran. But Zoroastrian tradition teaches that Zoroaster, also known in old Iranian as Zarathushtra or Zarathustra, was born around 628 BC probably at Rhages, Iran and he died –probably assassinated- about 551. He left his home in search of religious truth. After wandering and living alone for several years, he began to have revelations at the age of 30. In a vision, he spoke with Vohu Manah, a figure who represented the Good Mind. In the vision, Zoroaster's soul was led in a holy trance into the presence of Ahura Mazda. In the years after his revelations, Zoroaster composed the Gathas and spread the teachings of Ahura Mazda. Zoroaster's conversion of Vishtaspa, a powerful ruler, strengthened the new religion. Zoroaster was an Iranian religious reformer and founder of Zoroastrianism, or Parsiism, as it is known in India, and a major personality in the history of the religions of the world. Zoroaster has been the object of much attention for two reasons. - He became a legendary figure connected with occult knowledge and magical practices in the Near Eastern and Mediterranean world in the Hellenistic Age (300 BC to AD 300). - His monotheistic concept of God has attracted the attention of modern historians of religion, who have speculated on the connections between his teaching and Judaism and Christianity. Claims of pan-Iranianism, that Zoroastrian or Iranian ideas influenced Greek, Roman, and Jewish thought, may be disregarded; however the influence of Zoroaster's religious thought must be recognized but several problems concerning the religion's founder soon arise. For instance: What part of Zoroastrianism derives from Zoroaster's tribal religion and what part was new as a result of his visions and creative religious genius? To what extent does the later Zoroastrian religion (Mazdaism) of the Sasanian period (AD 224-651) genuinely reflected the teachings of Zoroaster? To what extent do the sources -the Avesta (the Zoroastrian scriptures) with the Gathas (older hymns), the Middle Persian Pahlavi Books, and reports of various Greek authors- offer an authentic guide to Zoroaster's ideas? Zoroaster’s biography is limited or speculative. The date of Zoroaster's life cannot be ascertained with any degree of certainty. According to Zoroastrian tradition, he flourished "258 years before Alexander the Great and this would put him in 588 BC. According to tradition, he was 40 years old when this event occurred, thus indicating that his birthdate was 628 BC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 13, 2003 Report Share Posted September 13, 2003 Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that Zoraster was a contemporary of the writers of the Gnostic Gospels. I believe he lived at least 600 years before. However, Zorastriansim introduced the concept of the the battle between the forces of the darkness and light and superimposed a dualistic belief system which filtered down into semetic religions. This contrasts with the Vedic belief in the fundamental unity of all. And as to my sources, well a number of years I wrote an unpublished novel about a contemporary gnostic sect. Unfortunately, I moved back to Canada a year ago from England. And I had to reduce my possessions to what I could carry with me. I had to leave over a 1000 books behind... so this was recreated from my memory. And yes, I think pleroma is the right word and not plethora. bb rb - Magdalene37 Friday, September 12, 2003 12:07 PM Re: Gnostic Gospels Greetings, Plethora? Or "pleroma." I was just wondering what the textual source is that you base your interpetation on. I'm not saying I disagree with your interpretation, it's just that gnostic texts are so complicated and, in many cases, we only have bits and pieces of them. There are many, many interpretations of gnostic texts and disagreements about what they mean. There is even the question of who exactly Zoraster was and huge discrepencies in the way scholars date his life. And is it Zoraster, also know as Zarathustra? Or is it the "Christian Gnostic," Zostrianos? (see below). Either way, it is most definitely uncertain whether he even lived during the time of Christ and the apostles. Given that the gnostic gosepls themselves supposedly contain teachings of Christ (Dialogue of the Savior), unless Zoraster was present we run into the same problem that we have with the canon--misinterpretations, mistranslations and alot of missing pieces. I think it's difficult to compare the two based on these circumstances. This website is very good if anyone is interesting in exploring the Nag Hammadi. http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhlalpha.html By Gilles C.H. Nullens: Little is known of Zoroaster's life. Some scholars believe he lived between 1400 and 1000 B.C. in what is now northeastern Iran. But Zoroastrian tradition teaches that Zoroaster, also known in old Iranian as Zarathushtra or Zarathustra, was born around 628 BC probably at Rhages, Iran and he died -probably assassinated- about 551. He left his home in search of religious truth. After wandering and living alone for several years, he began to have revelations at the age of 30. In a vision, he spoke with Vohu Manah, a figure who represented the Good Mind. In the vision, Zoroaster's soul was led in a holy trance into the presence of Ahura Mazda. In the years after his revelations, Zoroaster composed the Gathas and spread the teachings of Ahura Mazda. Zoroaster's conversion of Vishtaspa, a powerful ruler, strengthened the new religion. Zoroaster was an Iranian religious reformer and founder of Zoroastrianism, or Parsiism, as it is known in India, and a major personality in the history of the religions of the world. Zoroaster has been the object of much attention for two reasons. - He became a legendary figure connected with occult knowledge and magical practices in the Near Eastern and Mediterranean world in the Hellenistic Age (300 BC to AD 300). - His monotheistic concept of God has attracted the attention of modern historians of religion, who have speculated on the connections between his teaching and Judaism and Christianity. Claims of pan-Iranianism, that Zoroastrian or Iranian ideas influenced Greek, Roman, and Jewish thought, may be disregarded; however the influence of Zoroaster's religious thought must be recognized but several problems concerning the religion's founder soon arise. For instance: What part of Zoroastrianism derives from Zoroaster's tribal religion and what part was new as a result of his visions and creative religious genius? To what extent does the later Zoroastrian religion (Mazdaism) of the Sasanian period (AD 224-651) genuinely reflected the teachings of Zoroaster? To what extent do the sources -the Avesta (the Zoroastrian scriptures) with the Gathas (older hymns), the Middle Persian Pahlavi Books, and reports of various Greek authors- offer an authentic guide to Zoroaster's ideas? Zoroaster's biography is limited or speculative. The date of Zoroaster's life cannot be ascertained with any degree of certainty. According to Zoroastrian tradition, he flourished "258 years before Alexander the Great and this would put him in 588 BC. According to tradition, he was 40 years old when this event occurred, thus indicating that his birthdate was 628 BC. Sponsor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 13, 2003 Report Share Posted September 13, 2003 I was just thinking that this knowledge stressed in Pagels' reading of the Gnostic Gospels is similar to Nityananda telling Muktananda to put away his books and meditate. In a post from many months ago, someone said that Nityananda's encouragement to trust one's inner learning and knowing processes were a result of his being an "avadhoot." I recall at least one group member of Shakti Sadhana saying, before he knew it was Nityananda I was quoting, that whoever said to put away the books and meditate was a fool. I guess that in Vedic traditions, there are those "orthodox" believers who hold that scripture has all the answers, and others who say to look within to know god. If this is so, then there is a kind of gnosticism and orthodoxy competing in Vedic philosophy, too. That implies commonality between Christianity and Vedic teachings, even if the stories or parables of the spiritual traditions are different. Mary Ann , "redbreast" <the_redbreasted_one> wrote: > Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that Zoraster was a contemporary of the writers of the Gnostic Gospels. I believe he lived at least 600 years before. However, Zorastriansim introduced the concept of the the battle between the forces of the darkness and light and superimposed a dualistic belief system which filtered down into semetic religions. This contrasts with the Vedic belief in the fundamental unity of all. > > And as to my sources, well a number of years I wrote an unpublished novel about a contemporary gnostic sect. Unfortunately, I moved back to Canada a year ago from England. And I had to reduce my possessions to what I could carry with me. I had to leave over a 1000 books behind... so this was recreated from my memory. > > And yes, I think pleroma is the right word and not plethora. > > bb > rb > - > Magdalene37@a... > > Friday, September 12, 2003 12:07 PM > Re: Gnostic Gospels > > > Greetings, > > Plethora? Or "pleroma." > > I was just wondering what the textual source is that you base your interpetation on. I'm not saying I disagree with your interpretation, it's just that gnostic texts are so complicated and, in many cases, we only have bits and pieces of them. There are many, many interpretations of gnostic texts and disagreements about what they mean. > > There is even the question of who exactly Zoraster was and huge discrepencies in the way scholars date his life. And is it Zoraster, also know as Zarathustra? Or is it the "Christian Gnostic," Zostrianos? (see below). Either way, it is most definitely uncertain whether he even lived during the time of Christ and the apostles. Given that the gnostic gosepls themselves supposedly contain teachings of Christ (Dialogue of the Savior), unless Zoraster was present we run into the same problem that we have with the canon--misinterpretations, mistranslations and alot of missing pieces. I think it's difficult to compare the two based on these circumstances. > > This website is very good if anyone is interesting in exploring the Nag Hammadi. http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhlalpha.html > > By Gilles C.H. Nullens: Little is known of Zoroaster's life. Some scholars believe he lived between 1400 and 1000 B.C. in what is now northeastern Iran. But Zoroastrian tradition teaches that Zoroaster, also known in old Iranian as Zarathushtra or Zarathustra, was born around 628 BC probably at Rhages, Iran and he died -probably assassinated- about 551. He left his home in search of religious truth. After wandering and living alone for several years, he began to have revelations at the age of 30. In a vision, he spoke with Vohu Manah, a figure who represented the Good Mind. In the vision, Zoroaster's soul was led in a holy trance into the presence of Ahura Mazda. In the years after his revelations, Zoroaster composed the Gathas and spread the teachings of Ahura Mazda. Zoroaster's conversion of Vishtaspa, a powerful ruler, strengthened the new religion. > > Zoroaster was an Iranian religious reformer and founder of Zoroastrianism, or Parsiism, as it is known in India, and a major personality in the history of the religions of the world. Zoroaster has been the object of much attention for two reasons. > > - He became a legendary figure connected with occult knowledge and magical practices in the Near Eastern and Mediterranean world in the Hellenistic Age (300 BC to AD 300). > > - His monotheistic concept of God has attracted the attention of modern historians of religion, who have speculated on the connections between his teaching and Judaism and Christianity. > > Claims of pan-Iranianism, that Zoroastrian or Iranian ideas influenced Greek, Roman, and Jewish thought, may be disregarded; however the influence of Zoroaster's religious thought must be recognized but several problems concerning the religion's founder soon arise. For instance: > > What part of Zoroastrianism derives from Zoroaster's tribal religion and what part was new as a result of his visions and creative religious genius? > > To what extent does the later Zoroastrian religion (Mazdaism) of the Sasanian period (AD 224-651) genuinely reflected the teachings of Zoroaster? > > To what extent do the sources -the Avesta (the Zoroastrian scriptures) with the Gathas (older hymns), the Middle Persian Pahlavi Books, and reports of various Greek authors- offer an authentic guide to Zoroaster's ideas? > > Zoroaster's biography is limited or speculative. The date of Zoroaster's life cannot be ascertained with any degree of certainty. According to Zoroastrian tradition, he flourished "258 years before Alexander the Great and this would put him in 588 BC. According to tradition, he was 40 years old when this event occurred, thus indicating that his birthdate was 628 BC. > > > > > Sponsor > > > > > > > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 13, 2003 Report Share Posted September 13, 2003 Wow, that sounds very fascinating. I understand what you mean about the conceptual differences--the polarity versus unity. I agree. << And as to my sources, well a number of years I wrote an unpublished novel about a contemporary gnostic sect. Unfortunately, I moved back to Canada a year ago from England. And I had to reduce my possessions to what I could carry with me. I had to leave over a 1000 books behind... so this was recreated from my memory. >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 13, 2003 Report Share Posted September 13, 2003 Excellent point! In a message dated 9/12/03 10:57:16 PM, maryann writes: << I was just thinking that this knowledge stressed in Pagels' reading of the Gnostic Gospels is similar to Nityananda telling Muktananda to put away his books and meditate. In a post from many months ago, someone said that Nityananda's encouragement to trust one's inner learning and knowing processes were a result of his being an "avadhoot." I recall at least one group member of Shakti Sadhana saying, before he knew it was Nityananda I was quoting, that whoever said to put away the books and meditate was a fool. I guess that in Vedic traditions, there are those "orthodox" believers who hold that scripture has all the answers, and others who say to look within to know god. If this is so, then there is a kind of gnosticism and orthodoxy competing in Vedic philosophy, too. That implies commonality between Christianity and Vedic teachings, even if the stories or parables of the spiritual traditions are different. Mary Ann , "redbreast" <the_redbreasted_one> wrote: > Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that Zoraster was a contemporary of the writers of the Gnostic Gospels. I believe he lived at least 600 years before. However, Zorastriansim introduced the concept of the the battle between the forces of the darkness and light and superimposed a dualistic belief system which filtered down into semetic religions. This contrasts with the Vedic belief in the fundamental unity of all. > > And as to my sources, well a number of years I wrote an unpublished novel about a contemporary gnostic sect. Unfortunately, I moved back to Canada a year ago from England. And I had to reduce my possessions to what I could carry with me. I had to leave over a 1000 books behind... so this was recreated from my memory. > > And yes, I think pleroma is the right word and not plethora. > > bb > rb > - > Magdalene37@a... > > Friday, September 12, 2003 12:07 PM > Re: Gnostic Gospels > > > Greetings, > > Plethora? Or "pleroma." > > I was just wondering what the textual source is that you base your interpetation on. I'm not saying I disagree with your interpretation, it's just that gnostic texts are so complicated and, in many cases, we only have bits and pieces of them. There are many, many interpretations of gnostic texts and disagreements about what they mean. > > There is even the question of who exactly Zoraster was and huge discrepencies in the way scholars date his life. And is it Zoraster, also know as Zarathustra? Or is it the "Christian Gnostic," Zostrianos? (see below). Either way, it is most definitely uncertain whether he even lived during the time of Christ and the apostles. Given that the gnostic gosepls themselves supposedly contain teachings of Christ (Dialogue of the Savior), unless Zoraster was present we run into the same problem that we have with the canon--misinterpretations, mistranslations and alot of missing pieces. I think it's difficult to compare the two based on these circumstances. > > This website is very good if anyone is interesting in exploring the Nag Hammadi. http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhlalpha.html > > By Gilles C.H. Nullens: Little is known of Zoroaster's life. Some scholars believe he lived between 1400 and 1000 B.C. in what is now northeastern Iran. But Zoroastrian tradition teaches that Zoroaster, also known in old Iranian as Zarathushtra or Zarathustra, was born around 628 BC probably at Rhages, Iran and he died -probably assassinated- about 551. He left his home in search of religious truth. After wandering and living alone for several years, he began to have revelations at the age of 30. In a vision, he spoke with Vohu Manah, a figure who represented the Good Mind. In the vision, Zoroaster's soul was led in a holy trance into the presence of Ahura Mazda. In the years after his revelations, Zoroaster composed the Gathas and spread the teachings of Ahura Mazda. Zoroaster's conversion of Vishtaspa, a powerful ruler, strengthened the new religion. > > Zoroaster was an Iranian religious reformer and founder of Zoroastrianism, or Parsiism, as it is known in India, and a major personality in the history of the religions of the world. Zoroaster has been the object of much attention for two reasons. > > - He became a legendary figure connected with occult knowledge and magical practices in the Near Eastern and Mediterranean world in the Hellenistic Age (300 BC to AD 300). > > - His monotheistic concept of God has attracted the attention of modern historians of religion, who have speculated on the connections between his teaching and Judaism and Christianity. > > Claims of pan-Iranianism, that Zoroastrian or Iranian ideas influenced Greek, Roman, and Jewish thought, may be disregarded; however the influence of Zoroaster's religious thought must be recognized but several problems concerning the religion's founder soon arise. For instance: > > What part of Zoroastrianism derives from Zoroaster's tribal religion and what part was new as a result of his visions and creative religious genius? > > To what extent does the later Zoroastrian religion (Mazdaism) of the Sasanian period (AD 224-651) genuinely reflected the teachings of Zoroaster? > > To what extent do the sources -the Avesta (the Zoroastrian scriptures) with the Gathas (older hymns), the Middle Persian Pahlavi Books, and reports of various Greek authors- offer an authentic guide to Zoroaster's ideas? > > Zoroaster's biography is limited or speculative. The date of Zoroaster's life cannot be ascertained with any degree of certainty. According to Zoroastrian tradition, he flourished "258 years before Alexander the Great and this would put him in 588 BC. According to tradition, he was 40 years old when this event occurred, thus indicating that his birthdate was 628 BC. > > > > > Sponsor > > > > > > > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > ------------------------ Sponsor ---------------------~--> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark Printer at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. <A HREF="http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511">Click Here!</A> <A HREF="http://us.click./l.m7sD/LIdGAA/qnsNAA/XUWolB/TM">Click Here! </A> ---~-> Your use of is subject to ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: <sentto-3925944-7176-1063432585-Magdalene37=aol.com Received: from rly-xk01.mx.aol.com (rly-xk01.mail.aol.com [172.20.83.38]) by air-xk03.mail.aol.com (v95.13) with ESMTP id MAILINXK32-5703f62b1a6b8; Sat, 13 Sep 2003 01:57:16 -0400 Received: from n33.grp.scd. (n33.grp.scd. [66.218.66.101]) by rly-xk01.mx.aol.com (v95.1) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINXK12-5703f62b1a6b8; Sat, 13 Sep 2003 01:56:54 -0400 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-3925944-7176-1063432585-Magdalene37=aol.com Received: from [66.218.66.96] by n33.grp.scd. with NNFMP; 13 Sep 2003 05:56:25 -0000 X-Sender: maryann X-Apparently- Received: (qmail 35827 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2003 05:56:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.167) by m13.grp.scd. with QMQP; 13 Sep 2003 05:56:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n22.grp.scd.) (66.218.66.78) by mta6.grp.scd. with SMTP; 13 Sep 2003 05:56:24 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.157] by n22.grp.scd. with NNFMP; 13 Sep 2003 05:56:22 -0000 Message-ID: <bjubi5+ba45 (AT) eGroups (DOT) com> In-<000b01c379b3$b25dbb60$b2ce2642@oemcomputer> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 X-Mailer: Message Poster "Mary Ann" <maryann X-Originating-IP: 206.149.32.8 X--Profile: buttercookie61 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list ; contact -owner Delivered-mailing list Precedence: bulk List-Un: <> Sat, 13 Sep 2003 05:56:21 -0000 Re: Gnostic Gospels Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AOL-IP: 66.218.66.101 X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 1:XXX:XX X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 2 >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 13, 2003 Report Share Posted September 13, 2003 > I guess that in Vedic traditions, there are those "orthodox" > believers who hold that scripture has all the answers, and > others who say to look within to know God. Perhaps both are correct... All the answersmay be in the Scriptures - if only we could read them without prejudice. And certainly God is within awaiting to become known - if only our ego's loudness wasn't overwhelming His voice... >> ...Zorastriansim introduced the concept of the the battle between >> the forces of the darkness and light and superimposed a dualistic >> belief system which filtered down into semitic religions. This >> contrasts with the Vedic belief in the fundamental unity of all. Speaking of Semitic religions - they also (especially their esoteric part) proclaim the fundamental Unity. The division comes much later. >>And I had to reduce my possessions to what I could carry with >> me. I had to leave over a 1000 books behind... so this was >> recreated from my memory. When immigrating from a friendly east-european country, I left behind over 3500 books... I was very much willing to take them with me - but the state officials insisted on relieving me from that burden then and there. :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 13, 2003 Report Share Posted September 13, 2003 Good point Mouse. I would also add, about the scriptures: "If only we could write them without prejudice." , OptOnline <uri@o...> wrote: > Perhaps both are correct... All the answersmay be in the > Scriptures - if only we could read them without prejudice. > And certainly God is within awaiting to become known - if > only our ego's loudness wasn't overwhelming His voice... > > > >> ...Zorastriansim introduced the concept of the the battle between > >> the forces of the darkness and light and superimposed a dualistic > >> belief system which filtered down into semitic religions. This > >> contrasts with the Vedic belief in the fundamental unity of all. > > Speaking of Semitic religions - they also (especially their esoteric > part) proclaim the fundamental Unity. The division comes much later. > > >>And I had to reduce my possessions to what I could carry with > >> me. I had to leave over a 1000 books behind... so this was > >> recreated from my memory. > > When immigrating from a friendly east-european country, I left behind over 3500 books... > I was very much willing to take them with me - but the state officials insisted on > relieving me from that burden then and there. :-) > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 13, 2003 Report Share Posted September 13, 2003 > Good point Mouse. I would also add, about the scriptures: > "If only we could write them without prejudice." Thanks. I personally am pretty sure that it's not how they're written but how they're read. Our perceptions. , OptOnline <uri@o...> wrote: > Perhaps both are correct... All the answersmay be in the > Scriptures - if only we could read them without prejudice. > And certainly God is within awaiting to become known - if > only our ego's loudness wasn't overwhelming His voice... > > > >> ...Zorastriansim introduced the concept of the the battle between > >> the forces of the darkness and light and superimposed a dualistic > >> belief system which filtered down into semitic religions. This > >> contrasts with the Vedic belief in the fundamental unity of all. > > Speaking of Semitic religions - they also (especially their esoteric > part) proclaim the fundamental Unity. The division comes much later. > > >>And I had to reduce my possessions to what I could carry with > >> me. I had to leave over a 1000 books behind... so this was > >> recreated from my memory. > > When immigrating from a friendly east-european country, I left behind over 3500 books... > I was very much willing to take them with me - but the state officials insisted on > relieving me from that burden then and there. :-) > > > Sponsor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 13, 2003 Report Share Posted September 13, 2003 Dear Mouse, I am certain that you are correct in many instances about this. I am not going to quote any "judgmental" scriptures, but I know that some scriptures are judgmental, often denigrating the female or what may be perceived as "feminine" characteristics (such as men loving men - Christian / Jewish traditions). I have heard that some of the texts devoted to Devi do not honor women, even put them down. I feel it is the inabillity of the writer to accept fully and completely what is within the Self that causes such passages to be written. While it may be possible for the reader to look beyond those limitations and experience the spirit, I feel it is also important to recognize those errors so as not to continue to repeat and enforce them. I feel this is necessary for bringing true alignment, full consciousness, into Being. Im, Mary Ann , OptOnline <uri@o...> wrote: > > Good point Mouse. I would also add, about the scriptures: > > "If only we could write them without prejudice." > > Thanks. I personally am pretty sure that it's not how > they're written but how they're read. Our perceptions. > > > > , OptOnline <uri@o...> > wrote: > > > Perhaps both are correct... All the answersmay be in the > > Scriptures - if only we could read them without prejudice. > > And certainly God is within awaiting to become known - if > > only our ego's loudness wasn't overwhelming His voice... > > > > > > >> ...Zorastriansim introduced the concept of the the battle > between > > >> the forces of the darkness and light and superimposed a > dualistic > > >> belief system which filtered down into semitic religions. > This > > >> contrasts with the Vedic belief in the fundamental unity of > all. > > > > Speaking of Semitic religions - they also (especially their > esoteric > > part) proclaim the fundamental Unity. The division comes > much later. > > > > >>And I had to reduce my possessions to what I could carry > with > > >> me. I had to leave over a 1000 books behind... so this was > > >> recreated from my memory. > > > > When immigrating from a friendly east-european country, I left > behind over 3500 books... > > I was very much willing to take them with me - but the state > officials insisted on > > relieving me from that burden then and there. :-) > > > > > > > > > > Sponsor > > > > > > > > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 14, 2003 Report Share Posted September 14, 2003 i might want to imply that there is asome obscure, esoteric yet utterly causal connection between Zoroaster and the gnostic gospel writers. my saying so comes with humble apologies as it is intuitive rather than academic. but i recall seeing somewhere, i cannot remeber where-- i saw the name "Noah Ziushudra" it seemed conected -- Ziushudra with Zoroaster. the way in which names from history's lost cultures are often "Latinated" you know -- so I thought -- anyway so i googled and found this article where the idea is thet the Flood myth is a tale of many deities deciding to destroy humanity and that Noah Ziushudra's (Zoroaster's?) preservation is the story of One god's determination not to destroy the people. I look and i see the name Ziu-Shudra and of course i wonder at the connection of Zoroaster to the vedic unpleasantness with caste -- here is the article and the link. this is a stimulating topic and i want to lay down now. Noah, Ziusudra, Atra-hasis and Ut-napishtim The story of the flood (Bereishit 6-7) claims a central position in the first eleven chapters of the Book of Bereishit (Genesis), which deal with the history of the world up until the days of Abraham. The basic story is simple and well known: G-d decides, because of their sins, to wipe out all living beings from the face of the earth, and he reveals this to the righteous Noah. Noah creates the ark according to G-d's instructions and he accepts into it the members of his household and also pairs of each of the animal kingdom. The flood covers the earth and only the inhabitants of the ark remain alive. After the ark lands on Mount Ararat, Noah send birds out from the ark, in the tradition of ancient sailors. After he sends a raven (once) and a dove (three times), he realizes that the waters have subsided and he leaves the ark, builds an altar and raises up sacrifices on it. G-d smells the fragrant odour of the sacrifices, blesses Noah and his sons and promises them that he will never again bring a flood to the world. From then on man should expect that only tal u'matar (dew and rain) would descend from the heavens, bringing blessing to all of humanity. Stories of a great flood are found in the traditions of many nations but only ancient Mesopotamian traditions have stories that are significantly similar to the biblical account. (The name Mesopotamia refers to the region between the Tigris and the Euphrates.) In Mesopotamian traditions, as in the biblical story, the flood is seen as a something that divides between two distinct periods in the history of the world: events that took place "before the flood" and events that took place "after the flood". The Mesopotamian story, in its various forms, has reached us through a number of sources: the most famous being one of the most important Mesopotamian works: the "Gilgamesh Epic". Gilgamesh was a Sumerian king (circa 2600 B.C.) that became a legendary figure around whom arose many legends. Many years after his death, the "Gilgamesh Epic" was composed in Babylon that combined these stories into one consolidated epic. Towards the end of the epic, the reader is told of a meeting between Gilgamesh and Ut-napistim, the hero of the flood, who tells him the story of his life. The name Ut-napistim means "found life" and this is in keeping with his fate - after the flood the gods grant him eternal life. We also know an another Babylonian tradition about an alternative hero of the flood, Atra-hasis (Atra-hasis = "extra wise") and another abridged and more ancient Sumerian tradition of Ziusudra (meaning "master of long life", in accordance with his fate). On the basis of these and other Mesopotamian sources the following picture is revealed: the expansion of the human race, which was created to perform menial labour instead of the gods, disturbed their peace and quiet. After numerous unsuccessful attempts to reduce the human population, the deity Enlil decides to bring a flood to the world. Ea, the god of wisdom, reveals this plan to his beloved Atra-hasis and commands him to build a boat and to tell the people of his city that he is building it in order to escape from Enlil, the god of dry land. Atra-hasis, his family and possessions, animals of all types and the artisans that built the boat all embark onto the boat. After the flood, which lasted seven days, Atra-hasis sacrifices to the gods. The god Ninti, creator of man, promises to remember the flood, but Enlil, who discovers that Atra-hasis has been saved, is very angry. After Enlil learns of other methods to control the human population - barrenness, stillbirths, and the use of especially dedicated women who do not fall pregnant - he promises to never again bring a flood to the world. The biblical story is very similar to these stories in its format and also in many of its details. In all these stories, the flood destroys all of humanity, except for one man who is saved, by building an ark or boat, according to the exact instructions of a god, and he also rescues with him animals, thus ensuring the continuation of the world. After the flood the boat/ark lands on a mountain (Mount Nisir in the "Gilgamesh Epic", Mount Ararat in the biblical account), the hero sends out birds to check conditions on the outside: in the "Gilgamesh Epic" Ut-napistim sends a dove, a swallow, and a raven and after the last one does not return, he sends forth all the animals and offers sacrifices. In contrast Noah sends a raven and afterwards a dove and after it does not return he sends the animals forth from the ark and offers sacrifices. According to the story of Atra-hasis, the gods smelled his sacrifices and swooped down on him like hungry flies, and because of this Ninti vowed to remember the days of the flood. In the biblical account, after smelling Noah's sacrifice, G-d says"…neither will I again smite any more everything living, as I have done." (Bereishit 8:21) The similarity between the stories teaches us about the historical connection between the story in Bereishit and the Mesopotamian tradition. The earlier Mesopotamian tradition probably influenced the later Jewish tradition: in contrast to the geographical conditions in the land of Israel, floods were a common occurrence in ancient Mesopotamia and the development of a tradition of a flood is natural to the geographical conditions there. The Mesopotamian origins of the biblical story are apparent even in the name of the mountain on which the ark landed: Mount Ararat. Besides what we can learn from the similarity between the biblical and the Mesopotamian stories, we can also learn from the differences between them that show us the intentions of the biblical story. The Mesopotamian account is based on the contrast between the deities desire to destroy humanity and the opposition of this desire by a single deity. There is no place for this in the biblical account: the decision to destroy humanity but also to save a single righteous man are both attributed to G-d, and therefore there is no need to use treachery to reveal the upcoming flood to the hero of the story, as Ea does in the Mesopotamian story. G-d's mercies are displayed prominently in the biblical story: in contrast to the boat in the Mesopotamian story which is guided by a ship's captain, it is emphasized that Noah's ark is dependant only on G-d and in contrast to Ziusudra and Atra-hasis who have a person who helps them to seal up the door from the outside, in the biblical story this is performed by G-d himself (Bereishit 7:15). In the Mesopotamian story there is a blurring of the distinction between man and the gods: the gods themselves become frightened of the flood and the hero of these stories becomes a demigod himself in that he is granted eternal life. In contrast, the biblical account has no place for this: Noah continues to live on earth until his death and there is absolutely no hint of his becoming a deity or even being raised up to G-d. A central difference between the biblical story and the Mesopotamian tradition lies in the reason for the flood: in contrast to the arbitrary reason given in the Mesopotamian story, the disturbing noise made by man, in the biblical story the reason given is a moral one: the sins of G-d's creatures brings destruction to the world, and Noah's righteousness is what saves it. The emphasis on the moral aspect of the biblical story, proving that man's punishment was justified, is emphasized in post-biblical literature. According to this literature, G-d contained his anger for 120 years to allow man to repent (Midrash Tanchuma Noah - with reference to Bereishit 6:3). According to another tradition (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 108a-b and also previous to this in the apocryphal "Sibylline Oracles" A 127-135, 147-199) Noah rebukes the evildoers over a long period of time, but they do not heed his words. The comparison between the biblical story of Noah and its ancient counterparts, dealing with Ziusudra, Atra-hasis and Ut-napishtim, shows the common traditions on one and the uniqueness of the biblical account on the other hand. The ancient people of Israel where not a "nation which dwells alone" and when it claimed it's part of an ancient tradition, gave it it's own unique meaning which is characteristic of it's beliefs. http://www.jafi.org.il/education/torani/nehardeah/noah.html --- redbreast <the_redbreasted_one wrote: > Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that Zoraster was a > contemporary of the writers of the Gnostic Gospels. I > believe he lived at least 600 years before. However, > Zorastriansim introduced the concept of the the battle > between the forces of the darkness and light and > superimposed a dualistic belief system which filtered > down into semetic religions. This contrasts with the > Vedic belief in the fundamental unity of all. > > And as to my sources, well a number of years I wrote > an unpublished novel about a contemporary gnostic > sect. Unfortunately, I moved back to Canada a year ago > from England. And I had to reduce my possessions to > what I could carry with me. I had to leave over a 1000 > books behind... so this was recreated from my memory. > > And yes, I think pleroma is the right word and not > plethora. > > bb > rb > - > Magdalene37 > > Friday, September 12, 2003 12:07 PM > Re: Gnostic Gospels > > > Greetings, > > Plethora? Or "pleroma." > > I was just wondering what the textual source is that > you base your interpetation on. I'm not saying I > disagree with your interpretation, it's just that > gnostic texts are so complicated and, in many cases, > we only have bits and pieces of them. There are many, > many interpretations of gnostic texts and > disagreements about what they mean. > > There is even the question of who exactly Zoraster > was and huge discrepencies in the way scholars date > his life. And is it Zoraster, also know as > Zarathustra? Or is it the "Christian Gnostic," > Zostrianos? (see below). Either way, it is most > definitely uncertain whether he even lived during the > time of Christ and the apostles. Given that the > gnostic gosepls themselves supposedly contain > teachings of Christ (Dialogue of the Savior), unless > Zoraster was present we run into the same problem that > we have with the canon--misinterpretations, > mistranslations and alot of missing pieces. I think > it's difficult to compare the two based on these > circumstances. > > This website is very good if anyone is interesting > in exploring the Nag Hammadi. > http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhlalpha.html > > By Gilles C.H. Nullens: Little is known of > Zoroaster's life. Some scholars believe he lived > between 1400 and 1000 B.C. in what is now northeastern > Iran. But Zoroastrian tradition teaches that > Zoroaster, also known in old Iranian as Zarathushtra > or Zarathustra, was born around 628 BC probably at > Rhages, Iran and he died -probably assassinated- about > 551. He left his home in search of religious truth. > After wandering and living alone for several years, he > began to have revelations at the age of 30. In a > vision, he spoke with Vohu Manah, a figure who > represented the Good Mind. In the vision, Zoroaster's > soul was led in a holy trance into the presence of > Ahura Mazda. In the years after his revelations, > Zoroaster composed the Gathas and spread the teachings > of Ahura Mazda. Zoroaster's conversion of Vishtaspa, > a powerful ruler, strengthened the new religion. > > Zoroaster was an Iranian religious reformer and > founder of Zoroastrianism, or Parsiism, as it is known > in India, and a major personality in the history of > the religions of the world. Zoroaster has been the > object of much attention for two reasons. > > - He became a legendary figure connected with occult > knowledge and magical practices in the Near Eastern > and Mediterranean world in the Hellenistic Age (300 BC > to AD 300). > > - His monotheistic concept of God has attracted the > attention of modern historians of religion, who have > speculated on the connections between his teaching and > Judaism and Christianity. > > Claims of pan-Iranianism, that Zoroastrian or > Iranian ideas influenced Greek, Roman, and Jewish > thought, may be disregarded; however the influence of > Zoroaster's religious thought must be recognized but > several problems concerning the religion's founder > soon arise. For instance: > > What part of Zoroastrianism derives from Zoroaster's > tribal religion and what part was new as a result of > his visions and creative religious genius? > > To what extent does the later Zoroastrian religion > (Mazdaism) of the Sasanian period (AD 224-651) > genuinely reflected the teachings of Zoroaster? > > To what extent do the sources -the Avesta (the > Zoroastrian scriptures) with the Gathas (older hymns), > the Middle Persian Pahlavi Books, and reports of > various Greek authors- offer an authentic guide to > Zoroaster's ideas? > > Zoroaster's biography is limited or speculative. The > date of Zoroaster's life cannot be ascertained with > any degree of certainty. According to Zoroastrian > tradition, he flourished "258 years before Alexander > the Great and this would put him in 588 BC. According > to tradition, he was 40 years old when this event > occurred, thus indicating that his birthdate was 628 > BC. > > > > > Sponsor > > > > > > > > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > > ===== http://www.angelfire.com/indie/sweat/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 14, 2003 Report Share Posted September 14, 2003 Interesting points! Scholars believe that the "Noah story" of the Old Testament is a version of older myths: Stories of Atrahatis (written in Akkadian and found at sites in Syria-Palestine) and the Epic of Gilgamesh (The character, Utnapishtim; written in Akkadian and found at Nineveh). The stories reflect the ideologies, and the shift in ideology, as you point out in the ancient Near East. I'd recommend the book "Old Testament Parallels: Laws and Stories from the Ancient Near East," by Matthews and Benjamin if you are interested in the many mythic similarities that reveal changing and competing views about humanity, "God/s", etc. It's very interesting. Amirah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2003 Report Share Posted September 15, 2003 I find that the duality of identity in Zorasterism is an interesting concept, which has parallels in modern psychology. Are we not all more complex, more "gray," than merely being one thing only? I believe that the innate Spirit, regardless of any belief system, prompts human kind to seek Divinity, and to struggle against baser behaviors and instincts. Darwin postulated evolution on a physical and survival level, but I think we are still struggling to evolve on a spiritual level. We still have such a long way to go...... On this site, and a few others, we are opening windows of thought and belief, and breathing, expanding our lungs, and our consciousness. Think of all those who remain with the windows closed, and the shades drawn. Gwen of Crowhaven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 17, 2003 Report Share Posted September 17, 2003 Dear Gwen of Crowhaven, I agree that there is a spiritual evolution going. Different systems describe structures that start with the physical and end in some form of the spiritual. Ken Wilber has documented some of these systems. They include: *General Chain of Being*: matter, body, mind, soul, spirit *Aurobindo*: physical, sensation, perception, vital-emotional, lower mind, concrete mind, logical mind(reasoning), higher mind(systems), illuminated mind, intuitive mind, overmind, supermind, satchitananda *Kabbalah*: Malkhut, Yesod, Netzach/Hod, Tiferet, Chesed/Gevurah, Chokhman/Binah, Keter Ayn, Ein Sof *Vendanta*(sheaths): material(anna-mayakosha), emotional-sexual(prana- mayakosha), middle mind(mano-mayakosha), higher mind (vijnana- mayaksha), blis mind (ananda-mayakosha), Brahman-Atman(turiyatita) *Plotinus*: matter, sensation, perception, pleasure/pain, images, concepts/opinions, logical faculty, creative reason, world soul, nous, absolute one *Buddhist Vijnanans*: five senses, manovijnana(gross-reflecting mind), manas(higher mind), tainted alayavijnana(archetypal), nondual consciousness as suchness Ken Wilber and Sri Aurobindo, I know, believe that the world is spirtually evolving to these higher levels. I am just beginning to study Sri Aurobindo's _Life Divine_ which describes his view of these levels. I know that he placed a major emphasis on the Divine Feminine. And I personally believe that for the world to spirtually evolve, the Divine Feminine must be be reborn in each heart. And to relate this to some other posts, imo - regardless of whether a person follows the path of jnana(knowledge) or bkakti(devotion), the divine feminine will be part of the Self that is ultimately discovered. I think that Shakti lives within each of our selves and is found as we become our Self. Randy , Gwenofcrowhaven@a... wrote: > I find that the duality of identity in Zorasterism is an interesting concept, which has parallels in modern psychology. > > Are we not all more complex, more "gray," than merely being one thing only? > > I believe that the innate Spirit, regardless of any belief system, prompts human kind to seek Divinity, and to struggle against baser behaviors and instincts. Darwin postulated evolution on a physical and survival level, > but I think we are still struggling to evolve on a spiritual level. We still have such a long way to go...... > > On this site, and a few others, we are opening windows of thought and belief, and breathing, expanding our lungs, and our consciousness. Think of all those who remain with the windows closed, and the shades drawn. > > Gwen of Crowhaven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.