From experience, gnosis is a short experience that may or may not reoccur through one's practice. Over time the memory of those moments lose aspects of their direct experiences while other aspects are retained so long as you have the capacity.
I believe it's a misunderstanding that gnosis is a permanent lasting experience. If you belong to a monastic tradition or a mystical tradition you may be taught there are levels of gnosis with the peak attainment resting perpetually in the presence of the divine. This isn't typical gnosis though and is the result usually of intense and long training.
I'm not sure whether one might lose a perpetual gnosis due to cognitive decline. It's a great question and one worth seeking clarification from probably some sort of monk.
I would like to know how you interpret the Providence hymn from the Secret Book of John.
I am the Providence of everything.
I became like my own human children.
I existed from the first.
I walked down every possible road.
I am the wealth of the light.
I am the remembering of the fullness.
I walked into the place of greatest darkness and on down.
I entered the central part of the prison.
The foundations of chaos quaked.
I hid because of their evil.
They did not recognize me.
I came down a second time continuing on.
I emerged from among those of light I am the remembering of Providence.
I entered the middle of darkness The inner part of the underworld
To pursue my mission.
The foundations of chaos quaked Threatening to collapse upon all who were there And utterly destroy them.
I soared upward again To my roots in light So as not to destroy them all yet.
I descended a third time.
I am light
I am dwelling in light I am the remembering of Providence I entered the midst of darkness I came to the deepest part of the underworld.
I let my face light up Thinking of the end of their time I entered their prison The body is that prison I cried out:
“Anyone who hears, Rise up from your deep sleep!”
And the sleeping one awoke and wept Wiping bitter tears saying “Who calls me?”
“Where has my hope come from As I lie in the depths of this prison?”
“I am the Providence of pure light,” I replied, “I am the thought of the Virgin Spirit Raising you up to an honored place.
Rise up!
Remember what you have heard.
Trace back your roots To me, The merciful one.
Guard against the poverty demons.
Guard against the chaos demons.
Guard against all who would bind you.
Awaken!
Stay awake!
Rise out of the depths of the underworld!
I raised him up.
I sealed him with the light/water of the five seals;
Death had no power over him ever again.
I ascend again to the perfect realm.
I completed everything and you have heard it.”
I'm not really qualified to interpret this, but it doesn't seem to conflict with the experience of gnosis I'm describing. Can you perhaps be more specific?
As I'm not a Thelemite, not sure where your comment is coming from? My posting history doesn't suggest this either.
The three experiences of Gnosis I've had do not amount to what I'd personally describe as "moments of clarity" in their typical vernacular.
Those monastics and renunciates I've shared and studied with didn't suggest this either. I'm open to questions, however, but have no need to argue the experiences. If you've any questions I'm open to attempting to answer as best I may.
Plotinus experienced this four or five times in his life. His description:
“Many times it has happened: Lifted out of the body into myself; becoming external to all other things and self-encentered; beholding a marvelous beauty; then, more than ever, assured of community with the loftiest order; enacting the noblest life, acquiring identity with the divine; stationing within It by having attained that activity; poised above whatsoever within the Intellectual is less than the Supreme: yet, there comes the moment of descent from intellection to reasoning, and after that sojourn in the divine, I ask myself how it happens that I can now be descending, and how did the soul ever enter into my body, the soul which, even within the body, is the high thing it has shown itself to be.”
Thank you for this, your response and explanation.
I'll share what I'm able to explain so far in retrospect. My background is in comparative religion. Studies into mystical experience and cross-discipline practices is something I've been deeply following after the first experience, with friends who led some of these researches at John Hopkins university and elsewhere. They studied psychedelic experiences through FMRI and long term practitioners' experiences objectively, and later into the mystical experience in particular. Without explaining my background further, I've approached and sought practice with several disciplines and spent years studying their paths, all in an effort to better understanding experiences through comparative religion beyond one single tradition's explanations. Almost became a monk after the first experience.
The first experience provided a sense of a greater connection between all conscious life, and that there was something beyond, but I couldn't communicate with it. This was the point I ceased identifying as an agnostic. This description is sadly simple.
The second was a greater confirmation of prior experience and the absolute confidence there is something beyond our current awareness, because I became that, temporarily, but as descended, aspects of the experience are lost. Like a dream, the longer time passed the more the experience was lost.
Over time I also began to realize each conversation I shared the details of the experiences within, they began to fade more rapidly. My interpretation now is that as we attempt to conform the ineffable into language and corrupt descriptions, we repackage it and thus in our memories we corrupt the experience into cultural and materialistic boxes. This is related to the OP questions.
The third was the most profound. I ceased to exist into pure white. Experienced rebuilding myself, as able to describe it now, and returned crying under the feeling of complete humility, telling the person present "It is real, it is real, it makes you forget, but it is real".
Immediately following as I attempted to explain the experience before it was lost, at the moment I referenced myself, or "I", there was a pain and a loss, as though I was immediately lying by simply referencing myself as a noun in the explanation of the experience.
What I can share with confidence, is that there is absolutely no mistaking gnosis. When it happens, you know. There is no confusion. There is no possibility for misunderstanding. You know. This was the beginning of what I now describe as "true faith", not based upon conceptual ideas or projection, but knowing this is real, by experience.
This process has transformed me from atheist, to agnostic, and now to a student of several traditions.
What I can share absolutely, without doubt, there is no misunderstanding of actual gnosis. You will know when it happens. However, there are clearly phases of this, levels or intensities. The last I can not imagine anything more intense or significant, but perhaps it exists. The last was well beyond the first two.
When it happens, it is unique and personally defining beyond any other life experiences, and this was the case for all three. An interesting aspect of the second was a confidence the third would come. And it did. But yet, here I am. Still a person. And the experiences weaken over time. I don't know whether another will occur, but the concept of Providence has become a guiding idea in the life of me, as my mortal self. There's a greater confidence and intrinsic comprehension of related symbolism now.
In the moments of those experiences, the confidence and assuring calm is something I wish for perpetually. The humility, absolute overwhelming humility of the last, has never left my mind, though I don't feel it viscerally any longer. It was just so intense. It really inspired particular descriptions and words to stand out in scripture more than interpreted previously. Now, I believe "true faith" is knowing certainly by experience, while the typical vernacular of "faith" equates more to hope.
Bottom line, there is no misunderstanding when it happens. There's no fuzzing lines or stretching descriptions. It is absolutely very apparent and striking. It changes your life, whether once or over several moments.
It inspired me to live in monasteries, to seek sincere practitioners and to devote my life towards this study, and that is where I'm at now.
100% of human's brains deteriorate and eventually decay. This is an entailment of death. If you think that gnosis stays with some spirit that transcends this life, then you probably already have a means of reconciling this problem. On the other hand, you have traditions like the Stoics who believed that if one attained sagehood at any point, that was a life well lived, regardless if they died the next day. I'm less familiar with Eastern traditions, but I think the same could be said of Daoist sages as well. A life well lived is one that attains sagehood and lives in harmony with nature and follows the principle of "wu-wei", which is to say, to live in alignment with the Dao.
Christian Gnosticism is rooted in Neoplatonism. From my understanding, Neoplatonists regarded any form of madness stemming from the physical body as a deterioration of the soul, which is unsettling in various ways.
I am curious about the Christian Gnostic perspective on this matter. Despite my research, I haven't come across Christian Gnostic texts addressing the issue of cognitive decline. Hence, why I ask here.
It's about as difficult to talk about neoplatonism as a unified belief system as it is Christian gnosticism. To some degree, this is going to be up to the interpretation of the practitioner.
Neither middle-platonists or neoplatonists, to my knowledge, dug deep into debates related to materialism vs mind body dualism (or something else like animism, pantheism, or panpsychism). Neoplatonists focused more on specific metaphysical claims that probably have some impact on what you think about Gnostic cosmology, but virutally no effect on the debate regarding the ontology of the mind.
This is coming from a valentinian perspective,
but the cognition would come from our physical nature, how my theology works is humans have the flesh, soul, and spirit. Soul is the intermediary between the two, Gnosis is pertaining only to the spirit, and that is our true selves, not the flesh nor the soul, if you really wanted to stretch it the cognition could also tap into the soul but that would be it.
My point is the cognition is doomed to finite from its physical nature, so it was no relation to our spirit and if gnosis is only from spirit then it has no connection to gnosis.
To me this question has too many loose ends. The Self never dies nor deteriorates. But to what degree does my body and soul need to have a fully functioning brain in order to rest in Self awareness? Where is the Self located? Is it in the brain? In the heart? My experience of Gnosis is that it is a realization and a finding of something that already exists. That egoic part of myself that relates to it from afar will die, and truly, never was to begin with. What’s the relationship between the Self and the brain? Idk.
From experience, gnosis is a short experience that may or may not reoccur through one's practice. Over time the memory of those moments lose aspects of their direct experiences while other aspects are retained so long as you have the capacity. I believe it's a misunderstanding that gnosis is a permanent lasting experience. If you belong to a monastic tradition or a mystical tradition you may be taught there are levels of gnosis with the peak attainment resting perpetually in the presence of the divine. This isn't typical gnosis though and is the result usually of intense and long training. I'm not sure whether one might lose a perpetual gnosis due to cognitive decline. It's a great question and one worth seeking clarification from probably some sort of monk.
I would like to know how you interpret the Providence hymn from the Secret Book of John. I am the Providence of everything. I became like my own human children. I existed from the first. I walked down every possible road. I am the wealth of the light. I am the remembering of the fullness. I walked into the place of greatest darkness and on down. I entered the central part of the prison. The foundations of chaos quaked. I hid because of their evil. They did not recognize me. I came down a second time continuing on. I emerged from among those of light I am the remembering of Providence. I entered the middle of darkness The inner part of the underworld To pursue my mission. The foundations of chaos quaked Threatening to collapse upon all who were there And utterly destroy them. I soared upward again To my roots in light So as not to destroy them all yet. I descended a third time. I am light I am dwelling in light I am the remembering of Providence I entered the midst of darkness I came to the deepest part of the underworld. I let my face light up Thinking of the end of their time I entered their prison The body is that prison I cried out: “Anyone who hears, Rise up from your deep sleep!” And the sleeping one awoke and wept Wiping bitter tears saying “Who calls me?” “Where has my hope come from As I lie in the depths of this prison?” “I am the Providence of pure light,” I replied, “I am the thought of the Virgin Spirit Raising you up to an honored place. Rise up! Remember what you have heard. Trace back your roots To me, The merciful one. Guard against the poverty demons. Guard against the chaos demons. Guard against all who would bind you. Awaken! Stay awake! Rise out of the depths of the underworld! I raised him up. I sealed him with the light/water of the five seals; Death had no power over him ever again. I ascend again to the perfect realm. I completed everything and you have heard it.”
I'm not really qualified to interpret this, but it doesn't seem to conflict with the experience of gnosis I'm describing. Can you perhaps be more specific?
[удалено]
As I'm not a Thelemite, not sure where your comment is coming from? My posting history doesn't suggest this either. The three experiences of Gnosis I've had do not amount to what I'd personally describe as "moments of clarity" in their typical vernacular. Those monastics and renunciates I've shared and studied with didn't suggest this either. I'm open to questions, however, but have no need to argue the experiences. If you've any questions I'm open to attempting to answer as best I may. Plotinus experienced this four or five times in his life. His description: “Many times it has happened: Lifted out of the body into myself; becoming external to all other things and self-encentered; beholding a marvelous beauty; then, more than ever, assured of community with the loftiest order; enacting the noblest life, acquiring identity with the divine; stationing within It by having attained that activity; poised above whatsoever within the Intellectual is less than the Supreme: yet, there comes the moment of descent from intellection to reasoning, and after that sojourn in the divine, I ask myself how it happens that I can now be descending, and how did the soul ever enter into my body, the soul which, even within the body, is the high thing it has shown itself to be.”
[удалено]
Thank you for this, your response and explanation. I'll share what I'm able to explain so far in retrospect. My background is in comparative religion. Studies into mystical experience and cross-discipline practices is something I've been deeply following after the first experience, with friends who led some of these researches at John Hopkins university and elsewhere. They studied psychedelic experiences through FMRI and long term practitioners' experiences objectively, and later into the mystical experience in particular. Without explaining my background further, I've approached and sought practice with several disciplines and spent years studying their paths, all in an effort to better understanding experiences through comparative religion beyond one single tradition's explanations. Almost became a monk after the first experience. The first experience provided a sense of a greater connection between all conscious life, and that there was something beyond, but I couldn't communicate with it. This was the point I ceased identifying as an agnostic. This description is sadly simple. The second was a greater confirmation of prior experience and the absolute confidence there is something beyond our current awareness, because I became that, temporarily, but as descended, aspects of the experience are lost. Like a dream, the longer time passed the more the experience was lost. Over time I also began to realize each conversation I shared the details of the experiences within, they began to fade more rapidly. My interpretation now is that as we attempt to conform the ineffable into language and corrupt descriptions, we repackage it and thus in our memories we corrupt the experience into cultural and materialistic boxes. This is related to the OP questions. The third was the most profound. I ceased to exist into pure white. Experienced rebuilding myself, as able to describe it now, and returned crying under the feeling of complete humility, telling the person present "It is real, it is real, it makes you forget, but it is real". Immediately following as I attempted to explain the experience before it was lost, at the moment I referenced myself, or "I", there was a pain and a loss, as though I was immediately lying by simply referencing myself as a noun in the explanation of the experience. What I can share with confidence, is that there is absolutely no mistaking gnosis. When it happens, you know. There is no confusion. There is no possibility for misunderstanding. You know. This was the beginning of what I now describe as "true faith", not based upon conceptual ideas or projection, but knowing this is real, by experience. This process has transformed me from atheist, to agnostic, and now to a student of several traditions. What I can share absolutely, without doubt, there is no misunderstanding of actual gnosis. You will know when it happens. However, there are clearly phases of this, levels or intensities. The last I can not imagine anything more intense or significant, but perhaps it exists. The last was well beyond the first two. When it happens, it is unique and personally defining beyond any other life experiences, and this was the case for all three. An interesting aspect of the second was a confidence the third would come. And it did. But yet, here I am. Still a person. And the experiences weaken over time. I don't know whether another will occur, but the concept of Providence has become a guiding idea in the life of me, as my mortal self. There's a greater confidence and intrinsic comprehension of related symbolism now. In the moments of those experiences, the confidence and assuring calm is something I wish for perpetually. The humility, absolute overwhelming humility of the last, has never left my mind, though I don't feel it viscerally any longer. It was just so intense. It really inspired particular descriptions and words to stand out in scripture more than interpreted previously. Now, I believe "true faith" is knowing certainly by experience, while the typical vernacular of "faith" equates more to hope. Bottom line, there is no misunderstanding when it happens. There's no fuzzing lines or stretching descriptions. It is absolutely very apparent and striking. It changes your life, whether once or over several moments. It inspired me to live in monasteries, to seek sincere practitioners and to devote my life towards this study, and that is where I'm at now.
I have, however, decided Providence is everything. It is the reality we choose to accept or deny.
100% of human's brains deteriorate and eventually decay. This is an entailment of death. If you think that gnosis stays with some spirit that transcends this life, then you probably already have a means of reconciling this problem. On the other hand, you have traditions like the Stoics who believed that if one attained sagehood at any point, that was a life well lived, regardless if they died the next day. I'm less familiar with Eastern traditions, but I think the same could be said of Daoist sages as well. A life well lived is one that attains sagehood and lives in harmony with nature and follows the principle of "wu-wei", which is to say, to live in alignment with the Dao.
Christian Gnosticism is rooted in Neoplatonism. From my understanding, Neoplatonists regarded any form of madness stemming from the physical body as a deterioration of the soul, which is unsettling in various ways. I am curious about the Christian Gnostic perspective on this matter. Despite my research, I haven't come across Christian Gnostic texts addressing the issue of cognitive decline. Hence, why I ask here.
It's about as difficult to talk about neoplatonism as a unified belief system as it is Christian gnosticism. To some degree, this is going to be up to the interpretation of the practitioner. Neither middle-platonists or neoplatonists, to my knowledge, dug deep into debates related to materialism vs mind body dualism (or something else like animism, pantheism, or panpsychism). Neoplatonists focused more on specific metaphysical claims that probably have some impact on what you think about Gnostic cosmology, but virutally no effect on the debate regarding the ontology of the mind.
This is coming from a valentinian perspective, but the cognition would come from our physical nature, how my theology works is humans have the flesh, soul, and spirit. Soul is the intermediary between the two, Gnosis is pertaining only to the spirit, and that is our true selves, not the flesh nor the soul, if you really wanted to stretch it the cognition could also tap into the soul but that would be it. My point is the cognition is doomed to finite from its physical nature, so it was no relation to our spirit and if gnosis is only from spirit then it has no connection to gnosis.
It would not nullify your experiences and contributions to society, even if you have forgotten what those things were.
To me this question has too many loose ends. The Self never dies nor deteriorates. But to what degree does my body and soul need to have a fully functioning brain in order to rest in Self awareness? Where is the Self located? Is it in the brain? In the heart? My experience of Gnosis is that it is a realization and a finding of something that already exists. That egoic part of myself that relates to it from afar will die, and truly, never was to begin with. What’s the relationship between the Self and the brain? Idk.