gnosticism

[miss giggles]

yeah, i don't like the whole "the body is a bag of shit"-problem they have...
the same problem i have with buddhism- i mean, here in the west one tend to perceive buddhism as some kind of cuddly fluffy positive thing, while it's in reality is quite negative: karma is a negative spiral to be feared, rather than a "good" thing, and the whole "hatred of the body"-thing is a bit...erm...counter-productive, to use an understatement...

I don't understand your perception of Buddhism here. I'm a practiceing Buddhist, and Karma isn't something I fear. Karma is cause and effect, not reward and punishment, and it certainly doesn't have to be a negative spiral. We unconsiously live out the karma from our previous lives, but through our practice we can change that karma from negative into positive. That's why we practice. As for hatred of the body, do you mean monks in robes?

If so, then that's the more esoteric schools of Buddhism, which I'm not very well read on to be honest. But the Buddhism I follow respects and cherishes the body, as with the enviroment. Their only on loan to us afterall.

 

[maya]

I don't understand your perception of Buddhism here. I'm a practiceing Buddhist, and Karma isn't something I fear. Karma is cause and effect, not reward and punishment, and it certainly doesn't have to be a negative spiral. We unconsiously live out the karma from our previous lives, but through our practice we can change that karma from negative into positive. That's why we practice. As for hatred of the body, do you mean monks in robes?

If so, then that's the more esoteric schools of Buddhism, which I'm not very well read on to be honest. But the Buddhism I follow respects and cherishes the body, as with the enviroment. Their only on loan to us afterall.

of course karma doesn't have to be negative, as you say it's entirely up to every person and his/her action to determine which direction it will take-
but imo when buddhism reached the west, it was embraced as some sort of "wonder cure" by the hippies, and the concept of karma was misunderstood,
i don't necessarily believe that this will always be the case (there's always expections and insightful individuals),
many asian/eastern buddhists i've talked to have confirmed that generally speaking, western practitioners of buddhism tend to, in their view, focus too much on the "positive" aspects on karma, while it in their culture is seen more as a "frightening prospect" of what can happen (negatively) if you do something wrong...there the focus is on the danger, the scare-

i believe we westerners are shaped so much by our own culture that we can't fully comprehend the complexity of such arcane eastern traditions, and we bring our own assumptions and values into what we learn of it...
who was it that wrote that "buddhism is a perfect companion to the western consumer culture, it eases our bad conscience and so is a great way for wealthy middle-class westerners to reach catharsis and be content with the status quo without doing anything to change the system"...(?)

 

[maya]

i see that someone earlier mentioned the thomas evangelium, it looks interesting to me because this (iirc) is the only evangelium where jesus is talked about as ordinary human with no divine mumbo-jumbo qualities, but basically a visionary (ideologic and political) leader...

it is also very interesting to note that the dogma of jesus' "divinity" wasn't official policy until the church finally settled on it some centuries after his death...

it is fascinating to me, as a non-believer, to learn more about different religions and mythologies, both current and throughout human history,
also to compare different traditions to find similarities and contrasts...

for instance, nordic "åsatru" and its gods, especially as described in the scripture "Edda", have eerie similarities with the indian epic "Veda"...just a coincidence? these cultures had contact through viking traders, who travelled far and through most of the east...
the nordic "god" Odin, for instance, is believed to be based on a real historical figure who lived in what is now asia minor...(!)

also, the Sami (scandinavian aborigine people) religion of Seid/Shamanism and their beliefs is very interesting reading...their healing-practices especially, through natural remedies, herbal medicine etc. are almost lost after centuries of oppression and persecution, but some of the knowledge is preserved-

it's extremely interesting/weird to learn more about what odd and marvellous things people have actually believed about the world around them, how they've created mythologies and stories of cosmic hierarchies to try and understand the universe and its many wonders-
also how their worldviews have shaped their culture, customs, codes, language, understanding, art, creativity!

even in cases of almost complete ludicrousness, such as the belief in a flat or hollow earth, it's fun to see how these views have been uphold and defended, even fought for, for centuries- and how the societies and their thought have been shaped by it, for better or worse...

Re: Gnosticism: I've been recommended reading Teilhard de Chardin, preferrably the english translations (assume most is in french, mind!)

 

[rednblack]

i've been to a gnostic church in beirut - it was an incredible sensation of imagery, colour, iconism, and sweet smells - i was only 14 at the time so i don't remember much...

there is a lot of non authentic gnostic stuff out there, as 888 pointed out, but the nag hammadi stuff is as authentic as they can tell

 

[miss giggles]

of course karma doesn't have to be negative, as you say it's entirely up to every person and his/her action to determine which direction it will take-
but imo when buddhism reached the west, it was embraced as some sort of "wonder cure" by the hippies, and the concept of karma was misunderstood,
i don't necessarily believe that this will always be the case (there's always expections and insightful individuals),
many asian/eastern buddhists i've talked to have confirmed that generally speaking, western practitioners of buddhism tend to, in their view, focus too much on the "positive" aspects on karma, while it in their culture is seen more as a "frightening prospect" of what can happen (negatively) if you do something wrong...there the focus is on the danger, the scare-

i believe we westerners are shaped so much by our own culture that we can't fully comprehend the complexity of such arcane eastern traditions, and we bring our own assumptions and values into what we learn of it...
who was it that wrote that "buddhism is a perfect companion to the western consumer culture, it eases our bad conscience and so is a great way for wealthy middle-class westerners to reach catharsis and be content with the status quo without doing anything to change the system"...(?)

Ah ok, I understand what your saying now. Although I don't agree about the middle class thing. Buddhism is proactive. It teaches that everything in our enviroment is our responsibility, which includes all suffering. To do nothing is to create a cause in our own Karma of which there will be an effect.

 

[phildwyer]

Sounds a little bit like Fromm's 'For Man Himself' but from a more spiritual angle. Well from what Ive read so far of his book anyway.

Which would be about two paragraphs, if that's your conclusion.

 

[phildwyer]

There's also a bunch of features that are common in a lot of gnostic thought, though I don't know if they all have them. One is that the creator of this world is not god, but the devil, or "a very cruel being indeed" which obviously has its points, and this devil masquerades as God to us humans, or possibly has deluded himself into thinking he is God. Humans are sparks of divine spirit trapped within this inferior material creation, and trying, either to find a way out, (to ascend into heaven) or to bring the machine to life, and overthrow the creator and ruler of this creation. Within this context, gnostics saw Christ as a messenger from the god of the heavens, to try to reawaken humanity.

Yes, that's exactly right. Makes a lot more sense than orthodox Christianity if you ask me. Perhaps the greatest tragedy of human history was the orthodox suppression of the Arian branch of gnosticism, formalized in the fourth century Council at Nicea. But the Arians never disappeared, they just went underground, and they emerge in various "heretical" movements in every era. Personally, I reckon the jury is still out on gnosticism, and that its truth or falsehood will be decided in the course of human history. As Marx put it: "the issue of whether mankind can attain to objective truth is not a theoretical but a practical question." I will admit, however, that the prospects don't look too good at present...

 

[greenman]

Ahem....As far as I understand it the original Arians (As in Arius and his followers)were not gnostics in the sense used in this thread. And later arians - i.e. Socinians and unitarians, were not for the most part either.....
The confusion of late has been aided by Dan Brownism et al, some of whom deliberately or unintentionally confuse the two religious currents.
Arian beliefs evolved from a denial of the (non biblical) doctrine of the Trinity into affirmation of Jesus as a divinely inspired MAN, most gnostic currents evolved from a denial that that Godhead could ever be manifested in human (base material) form and tended towards seeing Jesus as some sort of immaterial phantom....