I’m very gratified and humble to see the postive response to my work so far. I stand on the shoulders of giants, and I can take no credit.

I’m particularly speechless to see how I have been seemingly been taken into the arms of what can only be called the ‘gnostic’ blogosphere. I suppose I could be considered a gnostic, but at times I’m not sure what that word even means in the common currency. It prompted me to think a bit, and perhaps give something back to the generous gnostic children of the light.

It’s interesting to see the gnostic meme take hold in the mainstream. I’m just barely old enought to remember when that wasn’t the case. Up untill a while ago it began and ended with phil dick, yeah?

I think Grant Morrison went a ways toward busting it out in his work on the Invisibles, which was ripped by the wachowski bros. for the Matrix. Which more or less paved the way for the wave of Phil Dick film adaptations we see now.

None of which I think is news, is it? That’s where it came from, but what has it become in practice? What does that word really mean now?

I think it comes in two parts:

One, we’ve got, because of the climate of spiritual degeneration we find ourselves in, a renewed commitment to what I can only call a Socratic inquiry into the realities of spirituality and religion. There’s a real strong thrust to think critcally about everything up to and including the godhead itself. And that’s good. The various emanations of the godhead aren’t afraid of questions. They can take it. It’s only the false rulers who need to be afraid of questions, which bring me to my second point.

Namely that there’s been an accompanying thrust to point a finger at the control systems, the false rulers, the false gods, the false realites, and show them for what they are. Where once we had a vauge sense of opression and deception and confusion, we have names for these things. We have names for our Archons, our Demiurges, our Hollow Men, our agents of the control system. And before you can confront your opressor, you need to recognise him, so let’s give big ups to that effort as well.

So in a sense I think the gnostic current these days is a kind of immune response in the collective human consciousness. A response to an assualt of falsehood, of ignorance, of counterfiet spirituality.

I guess my only concern is that a lot of gnostics out here seem to stop at questioning, to stop at naming, and never really arrive anywhere. There’s a danger of becoming so lost in criticism and paranoia that you can’t see the truth when it hits you in face. It’s good to be an antibody for the human spirit, but far better to be a whole human being. To be the free and enlightened creatures we were intended to be. To name the jailers and expose their lies, and then to take back the power they’ve robbed from us. To take up the mantle of the rightious warriors of heaven.

These are my humble thoughts and I cast them into the arms of my new friends to do with as they will.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Gnostic Love Fest

  1. “I guess my only concern is that a lot of gnostics out here seem to stop at questioning, to stop at naming, and never really arrive anywhere. There’s a danger of becoming so lost in criticism and paranoia that you can’t see the truth when it hits you in face. It’s good to be an antibody for the human spirit, but far better to be a whole human being. To be the free and enlightened creatures we were intended to be. To name the jailers and expose their lies, and then to take back the power they’ve robbed from us. To take up the mantle of the rightious warriors of heaven.”

    True dat, we have to be careful to walk a path that is healthily skeptic but not unhealthily nihilistic. That said, I know for a fact that a good number of the folks in the blogosphere have a good perspective. I’ve had good dialogue with Mr Puma most of all, he’s a sharp guy with good writing skills and a brain for science.

    As for “being a whole human being,” CG Jung considered the ancient Gnostics to be nothing less than depth psychologists, and their methods to be little less than a ritualized process of individuation, or progress toward wholeness.

    Speaking of science, one of the big points of gnosticism that ended up hooking me was how modern science seemingly proves a number of beliefs that gnostics used to be burnt at the stake for. Check out Wilber’s “Quantum Questions” for a fascinating look at this phenomenon. Wilber does the most, if you ask me, of any postmodern philosopher in integrating religious systems (namely Buddhism, his fave) with scientific and philosophical systems.

    Stay tuned to my website, once I have illuminated all the necessary background material I’m going to expound on how the gnostic psychology of Paul is basically proven by the Beck and Cowan Spiral, hook line and sinker.

    I believe we are living in a very exciting time!!!

    By the way – what esoteric Buddhism do you practice?

  2. well, that’s an involved question, but the simple answer is, that all buddhism sourced in the original pali cannon is esoteric. which is pretty much where it’s at for our order over here.

    certainly there have been some remarkable commentaries since gotama’s day, but I haven’t found anything that doesn’t have it’s roots in his original dispensation, with a very possible exception of nagarjuna and the nondual realisation but i suspect that for the same reason gotama didn’t spell out the reality of god, he didn’t push for the unity of god with all manifest existance.

    I suppose the characteristic feature would be our acknowledgement of the unity of faiths in the same manner as perrenial tradition, which lets us pull in stuff from all over to illuminate the dharma from many angles.

    but yeah, big question. obviously a topic or ten waiting to be done.

  3. ah, i’m starting to see where you’re coming from. my buddhist tendencies lean toward the mahayana (although i am not practicing). also, i am probably kind of cynical in that i tend to see most (but certainly not all) attempts to ‘return’ to original canon – in any tradition – to be modernist distortions, potentially reactionary, and more particular than perennial. i will try to keep an open mind and will try to keep my comments constructive in the best tradition of socratic questioning. looking forward to the blog.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s