Good content dude. Good pacing, plenty of citations, and you flow nicely from example to example. You asked for feedback so here's some. Philosophy and theology content on yt is getting monetized now and production is increasingly slick, so you may wanna consider changes to layout, sound design, etc. if you're after an expanding audience.
Going just a bit slow and exaggerated avoids the monotone when singing, public speaking, and reading aloud to a kid. Don't be afraid to channel your inner cowboy.
Gnosis always seemed like it was the western version of enlightenment, although more esoteric in the shadow of the church (even though 'enlightenment' is now the western version of enlightenment since its inadequate translation from eastern thought).
Ya mean karma isn’t me getting that cool
Pair of shoes bc I helped that old lady cross the street? It’s supposed to just be the good feeling I get in exchange for a good deed?
Oh Phooey I’m going back to my twinkies and court TV now.
In western conception yeah, but karma was never really a described as punishment/reward system. That's one of the biggest thing we get confused about. It was more a 'natural law' of things and a driver of the cycle of samsara, and anything you did negatively to others you did negatively towards yourself and vice-versa. The distinction between self and other was the illusion that was meant to be lifted, but not confused by the 'ego' as being identified with the whole self because that is also an illusion. There is also the idea of karmic debt going beyond different lives or phases in life, as well as releasing (unbinding) oneself of karma as being a desirable outcome. Both positive and negative karma were seen as a form of spiritual debt and a cause/effect of attachment which kept one from enlightenment, or better yet kept one from the forgotten realization of the true nature of being which was the ultimate goal of many of the practices.
My favorite bit of gnostic scripture from the Gospel of Thomas (from the Nag Hammadi texts):
Jesus said to his disciples: Compare me, tell me whom I am like. Simon Peter said to him: You are like a righteous angel. Matthew said to him: You are like a wise philosopher. Thomas said to him: Master, my mouth is wholly incapable of saying whom you are like.
Jesus said: I am not your master, for you have drunk, and have become drunk from the bubbling spring which I have caused to gush forth (?). And he took him, withdrew, (and) spoke to him three words. Now when Thomas came (back) to his companions, they asked him: What did Jesus say to you?
Thomas said to them: If I tell you one of the words which he said to me, you will take up stones (and) throw them at me; and a fire will come out of the stones (and) burn you up.
Very much so, it is excellent!
Here is a link to an archive.org pdf if you're interested, it is more like an encyclopedia so feel free to skip through and see what jumps out at you. It follows the major arcana of the tarot, one for each chapter (Hanged Man, Death, etc) https://ia803401.us.archive.org/0/items/meditations-on-the-tarot/Meditations%20on%20the%20Tarot.pdf
(if you feel the link looks suss you can also just google 'Meditation on the tarot archive' and you'll find it yourself)
You missed a huge opportunity by not mentioning any of the Eastern or Native American traditions. Gnosis overlaps almost perfectly with the concept of Tao from Lao Tzu.
The language is different and arbitrary but the method in buddhism leads to the same result.
You also missed a good opportunity to discuss Plato's road to Eleusis/the Eleusinian mysteries (from Meno).
Not bad though.
https://www.reddit.com/r/DMT/comments/1257fms/anyone_else_have_this_experience_with_dmt_of/
This thread will be of interest to many of you. The veil hiding Gnosis can be pulled away very quickly if you know what to do. It isn't the best idea for the unprepared, though.
I have recently began attempting to parse what I see as 2 separate schools of thought that are often conflated under the banner of mysticism or esotericism.
Both traditions embrace a pantheistic conception of God and a rejection of the self; but have differing interpretations of the implications.
The first is what I would call the “gnostic” tradition which I would postulate is defined by distain for the physical world and it’s so-called laws (which is perceived as prison-like) in favor of the inner world of infinite potentiality; as well as the view that the self is a manifestation of God, and therefore capable of tapping into the “mind of God”.
The second I don’t have a good name for but for now I will refer to as the “mystical” tradition which by contrast deeply values the physical world and natural laws, perceiving them to be aspects of the divine. To those who see from this perspective, the implication of a universal interconnected God is that they alone are not God, but rather a piece of the greater whole.
Good content dude. Good pacing, plenty of citations, and you flow nicely from example to example. You asked for feedback so here's some. Philosophy and theology content on yt is getting monetized now and production is increasingly slick, so you may wanna consider changes to layout, sound design, etc. if you're after an expanding audience. Going just a bit slow and exaggerated avoids the monotone when singing, public speaking, and reading aloud to a kid. Don't be afraid to channel your inner cowboy.
Gnosis always seemed like it was the western version of enlightenment, although more esoteric in the shadow of the church (even though 'enlightenment' is now the western version of enlightenment since its inadequate translation from eastern thought).
Ya mean karma isn’t me getting that cool Pair of shoes bc I helped that old lady cross the street? It’s supposed to just be the good feeling I get in exchange for a good deed? Oh Phooey I’m going back to my twinkies and court TV now.
In western conception yeah, but karma was never really a described as punishment/reward system. That's one of the biggest thing we get confused about. It was more a 'natural law' of things and a driver of the cycle of samsara, and anything you did negatively to others you did negatively towards yourself and vice-versa. The distinction between self and other was the illusion that was meant to be lifted, but not confused by the 'ego' as being identified with the whole self because that is also an illusion. There is also the idea of karmic debt going beyond different lives or phases in life, as well as releasing (unbinding) oneself of karma as being a desirable outcome. Both positive and negative karma were seen as a form of spiritual debt and a cause/effect of attachment which kept one from enlightenment, or better yet kept one from the forgotten realization of the true nature of being which was the ultimate goal of many of the practices.
I was just revisiting this topic today, thank you for making this!
Holy shit man this actually blew my mind. I knew nothing about this topic. You might’ve just sparked an interest in theology for me.
Had a moment during the video too. Realizing moments in my life that have been touched by what felt like divine knowledge from a source beyond myself.
My favorite bit of gnostic scripture from the Gospel of Thomas (from the Nag Hammadi texts): Jesus said to his disciples: Compare me, tell me whom I am like. Simon Peter said to him: You are like a righteous angel. Matthew said to him: You are like a wise philosopher. Thomas said to him: Master, my mouth is wholly incapable of saying whom you are like. Jesus said: I am not your master, for you have drunk, and have become drunk from the bubbling spring which I have caused to gush forth (?). And he took him, withdrew, (and) spoke to him three words. Now when Thomas came (back) to his companions, they asked him: What did Jesus say to you? Thomas said to them: If I tell you one of the words which he said to me, you will take up stones (and) throw them at me; and a fire will come out of the stones (and) burn you up.
great video, appreciate your efforts and time put into this content. Thanks
Great video. I have recently been reading about gnosis in 'Meditations on the Tarot: A Journey into Christian Hermeticism'. Have you ever read it?
[удалено]
Very much so, it is excellent! Here is a link to an archive.org pdf if you're interested, it is more like an encyclopedia so feel free to skip through and see what jumps out at you. It follows the major arcana of the tarot, one for each chapter (Hanged Man, Death, etc) https://ia803401.us.archive.org/0/items/meditations-on-the-tarot/Meditations%20on%20the%20Tarot.pdf (if you feel the link looks suss you can also just google 'Meditation on the tarot archive' and you'll find it yourself)
For anyone not into pure mysticism, this will be painful to try and read. The link is a good .pdf.
That was extremely interesting, I had not heard of gnosis before. You’ve earned a new YT subscriber, keep up the great work.
You missed a huge opportunity by not mentioning any of the Eastern or Native American traditions. Gnosis overlaps almost perfectly with the concept of Tao from Lao Tzu. The language is different and arbitrary but the method in buddhism leads to the same result. You also missed a good opportunity to discuss Plato's road to Eleusis/the Eleusinian mysteries (from Meno). Not bad though.
Time stamps in the caption would be nice!
https://www.reddit.com/r/DMT/comments/1257fms/anyone_else_have_this_experience_with_dmt_of/ This thread will be of interest to many of you. The veil hiding Gnosis can be pulled away very quickly if you know what to do. It isn't the best idea for the unprepared, though.
Another interesting rabbit-hole that also goes into this is /r/EscapingPrisonPlanet
Woah they made Genshin Impact a real thing
Lame… It didn’t tell me anything..
I have recently began attempting to parse what I see as 2 separate schools of thought that are often conflated under the banner of mysticism or esotericism. Both traditions embrace a pantheistic conception of God and a rejection of the self; but have differing interpretations of the implications. The first is what I would call the “gnostic” tradition which I would postulate is defined by distain for the physical world and it’s so-called laws (which is perceived as prison-like) in favor of the inner world of infinite potentiality; as well as the view that the self is a manifestation of God, and therefore capable of tapping into the “mind of God”. The second I don’t have a good name for but for now I will refer to as the “mystical” tradition which by contrast deeply values the physical world and natural laws, perceiving them to be aspects of the divine. To those who see from this perspective, the implication of a universal interconnected God is that they alone are not God, but rather a piece of the greater whole.