Sari la conținut
Forum Roportal
danutzzz

Seven sermons - sau sapte "pasaje"

Postări Recomandate

Ce am mai gasit interesant pe net ... nu stiu exact cum s-ar traduce "sermon" in romana, dar nu cred ca e asa importanta traducerea. Din pacate nu am nici traducerea in romana a textului ... nu cred ca exista :think:

 

Dupa mintea mea ... contine niste adevaruri sau un adevar MARE :lol2:

M-am gandit ca poate intereseaza si pe altcineva :D

 

Sermo I.

 

The Dead came back from Jerusalem, where they found not what they sought. They prayed me let them in and besought my word, and thus I began my teaching. Harken: I begin with nothingness. Nothingness is the same as fullness. In infinity full is no better than empty. Nothingness is both empty and full. As well might ye say anything else of nothingness, as for instance, white is it, or black, or again, it is not, or it is. A thing that is infinite and eternal hath no qualities, since it hath all qualities. This nothingness or fullness we name the Pleroma.

 

Therein both thinking and being cease, since the eternal and infinite possess no qualities. In it no being is, for he then would be distinct from the Pleroma, and would possess qualities which would distinguish him as something distinct from the Pleroma. In the Pleroma there is nothing and everything. It is quite fruitless to think about the Pleroma, for this would mean self-dissolution. Creatura is not in the Pleroma, but in itself. The Pleroma is both beginning and end of the created beings. It pervadeth them, as the light of the sun everywhere pervadeth the air. Although the Pleroma prevadeth altogether, yet hath created being no share thereof, just as wholly transparent body becometh neither light nor dark through the light nor dark through the light which pervadeth it. We are, however, the Pleroma itself, for we are a part of the eternal and the infinite. But we have no share thereof, as we are from the Pleroma infinitely removed; not spiritually or temporally, but essentially, since we are distinguished from the Pleroma in our essence as creatura, which is confined within time and space.

 

Yet because we are parts of the Pleroma, the Pleroma is also in us. Even in the smallest point is the Pleroma endless, eternal, and entire, since small and great are qualities which are contained in it. It is that nothingness which is everywhere whole and continuous. Only figuratively, therefore, do I speak of created being as part of the Pleroma. Because, actually, the Pleroma is nowhere divided, since it is nothingness. We are also the whole Pleroma, because, figuratively, the Pleroma is the smallest point (assumed only, not existing) in us and the boundless firmament about us. But wherefore, then, do we speak of the Pleroma at all, since it is thus everything and nothing? I speak of it to make a beginning somewhere, and also to free you from the delusion that somewhere, either without or within,there standeth something fixed, or in some way established, from the beginning. Every so-called fixed and certain thing is only relative. That alone is fixed and certain which is subject to change. What is changeable, however, is creature. Therefore is it the one thing which is fixed and certain because it hath qualities: or as even a quality itself.

 

The question ariseth: How did creatura originate? Created beings came to pass, not creatura: since created being is the very quality of the Pleroma, as much as non-creation which is the eternal death. In all times and places is creation, in all times and places is death. The Pleroma hath all, distinctiveness and non-distinctiveness. Distinctiveness is creatura. It is distinct. Distinctiveness is its essence. and therefore it distinguisheth. Wherefore also he distinguished qualities of the Pleroma which are not. He distinguisheth them out of his own nature. Therefore he must speak of qualities of the Pleroma which are not.

 

What use, say ye, to speak of it? Saidst thou not thyself, there is no profit in thinking upon the Pleroma? That said I unto you, to free you from the delusion that we are able to think about the Pleroma. When we distinguish qualities of the Pleroma, we are speaking from the ground of our own distinctiveness and concerning our own distinctiveness. But we have said nothing concerning the Pleroma. Concerning our own distinctiveness, however, it is needful to speak, whereby we may distinguish ourselves enough. Our very nature is distinctiveness. If we are not true to this nature we do not distinguish ourselves enough. Therefore must we make distinctions of qualities.

 

What is the harm, ye ask, in not distinguishing oneself? If we do not distinguish, we get beyond our own nature, away from creatura. We fall into indistinctiveness, which is the other quality of the Pleroma. We fall into the Pleroma itself and cease to be creatures. We are given over to dissolution in nothingness. This is the death of the creature. Therefore we die in such measure as we do not distinguish. Hence the natural striving of the creature goeth towards distinctiveness, fighteth against primeval, perilous sameness. This is called the PRINCIPIUM INDIVIDUATIONIS. This principle is the essence of the creature. From this you can see why indistictiveness and non-distinction are a great danger for the creature. We must, therefore, distinguish the qualities of the Pleroma.The qualities are PAIRS OF OPPOSITES, such as -

 

The Effective and the ineffective.

Fullness and Emptiness.

Living and Dead.

Difference and Sameness.

Light and Darkness.

The Hot and the Cold.

Force and Matter.

Time and Space.

Good and Evil.

Beauty and Ugliness.

The One and the Many.

 

The pairs of opposites are qualities of the Pleroma which are not, because each balanceth each. As we are the Pleroma itself, we also have all these qualities in us. Because the very ground of our nature is distinctiveness, which meaneth -

 

1. These qualities are distinct and separate in us one from the other; therefore they are not balanced and void, but are effective. Thus are the victims of the pairs of opposites. The Pleroma is rent in us.

 

2. The qualities belong to the Pleroma, and only in the name and sign of distinctiveness can and must we possess and live them. We must distinguish ourselves from qualities. In the Pleroma they are balanced and void; in us not. Being distinguished from them delivereth us.

 

 

When we strive after the good or the beautiful, we thereby forget our own nature, which is distinctiveness, and we are delivered over to the qualities of the Pleroma, which are pairs of opposites. We labor to attain the good and the beautiful, yet at the same time we also lay hold of the evil and the ugly, since in the Pleroma these are one with the good and the beautiful. When, however, we remain true to our own nature, which is distinctiveness, we distinguish ourselves from the good and the beautiful, therefore, at the same time, from the evil and ugly. And thus we fall not into the Pleroma, namely, into nothingness and dissolution. Thou sayest, ye object, that difference and sameness are also qualities of the Pleroma. How would it be, then, if we strive after difference? Are we, in so doing, not true to our own nature? And must we none the less be given over to the sameness when we strive after difference?

 

Ye must not forget that the Pleroma hath no qualities. We create them through thinking. If, therefore, ye strive after difference or sameness, or any qualities whatsoever, ye pursue thought which flow to you out of the Pleroma: Thoughts, namely, concerning non-existing qualities of the Pleroma. Inasmuch as ye run after these thoughts, ye fall again into the Pleroma, and reach difference and sameness at the same time. Not your thinking, but your being, is distinctiveness. Therefore not after difference, ye think it, must ye strive; but after YOUR OWN BEING. At bottom, therefore, there is only one striving, namely, the striving after your own being. If ye had this striving ye would not need to know anything about the Pleroma and its qualities, and yet would ye come to your right goal by virtue of your own being. Since, however, thought estrangeth from being, that knowledge must I teach you wherewith ye may be able to hold your thought in leash.

 

Sermo II.

 

In the night the dead stood along the wall and cried: We would have knowledge of god. Where is god? Is god dead? God is not dead. Now, as ever, he liveth. God is creatura, for he is something definite, and therefore distinct from the Pleroma. God is quality of the Pleroma, and everything I said of creatura also is true concerning him. He is distinguished, however, from created beings through this, that he is more indefinite and indeterminable than they. He is less distinct than created beings, since the ground of his being is effective fullness. Only in so far as he is definite and distinct is he creatura, and in like measure is he the manifestation of the effective fullness of the Pleroma.

 

Everything which we do not distinguish falleth into the Pleroma and is made void by its opposite. If, therefore, we do not distinguish god, effective fullness is for us extinguished. Moreover god is the Pleroma itself, as likewise each smallest point in the created and uncreated is Pleroma itself. Effective void is the nature of the devil. God and devil are the first manifestations of nothingness, which we call the Pleroma. It is indifferent whether the Pleroma is or is not, since in everything it is balanced and void. Not so creatura. In so far as god and devil are creatura they do not extinguish each other, but stand one against the other as effective opposites. We need no proof of their existence. It is enough that we must always be speaking of them. Even if both were not, creatura, of its own essential distinctiveness, would forever distinguish them anew out of the Pleroma.

 

Everything that discrimination taketh out of the Pleroma is a pair of opposites. To god, therefore, always belongeth the devil. This inseparability is as close and, as your own life hath made you see, as indissoluble as the Pleroma itself. Thus it is that both stand very close to the Pleroma, in which all opposites are extinguished

and joined.

 

God and devil are distinguished by the qualities of fullness and emptiness, generation and destruction. EFFECTIVENESS is common to both. Effectiveness joineth them. Effectiveness, therefore, standeth above both; is a god above god, since in its effect it uniteth fullness and emptiness. This is a god whom ye knew not, for mankind forgot it. We name it by its name ABRAXAS. It is more indefinite still than god and devil. That god may be distinguished from it, we name god HELIOS or sun . Abraxas is effect. Nothing standeth opposed to it but the ineffective; hence its effective nature freely unfoldeth itself. The ineffective is not, therefore resisteth not. Abraxas standeth above the sun and above the devil. It is improbable probability, unreal reality. Had the Pleroma a being, Abraxas would be its manifestation. It is the effective itself, nor any particular effect, but effect in general.

 

It is unreal reality, because it hath no definite effect. It is also creatura, because it is distinct from the Pleroma. The sun hath a definite effect, and so hath the devil. Wherefore do they appear to us more effective than indefinite Abraxas. It is force, duration, change. The dead now raised a great tumult, for they were Christians.

 

Sermo III.

 

Like mists arising from a marsh, the dead came near and cried: Speak further unto us concerning the supreme god. Hard to know is the deity of Abraxas. Its power is the greatest, because man perceiveth it not. From the sun he draweth the summum bonum; from the devil the infinum malum: But from Abraxas LIFE, altogether indefinite, the mother of good and evil.

 

Smaller and weaker life seemeth to be than the summum bonum; wherefore is it also hard to conceive that Abraxas transcendeth even the sun in power, who is himself the radiant source of all the force of life. Abraxas is the sun, and at the same time the eternally sucking gorge of the void, the belittling and dismembering devil.

 

The power of Abraxas is twofold; but ye see it not, because for your eyes the warring opposites of this power are extinguished. What the god-sun speaketh is life. What the devil speaketh is death. But Abraxas speaketh that hallowed and accursed word which is life and death at the same time. Abraxas begetteth truth and lying, good and evil, light and darkness, in the same word and in the same act. Wherefore is Abraxas terrible.

 

It is splendid as the lion in the instant he striketh down his victim.

It is beautiful as a day in spring.

It is the great Pan himself and also the small one.

It is Priapos.

It is the monster of the underworld, a thousand-armed polyp, coiled knot of winged serpents, frenzy.

It is the hermaphrodite of the earliest beginning.

It is the lord of the toads and frogs, which live in the water and gets up on the land, whose chorus ascendeth at noon and at midnight.

It is abundance that seeketh union with emptiness.

It is holy begetting.

It is love and love's murder.

It is the saint and his betrayer.

It is the brightest light of day and the darkest night of madness.

To look upon it, is blindness.

To know it, is sickness.

To worship it, is death.

To fear it, is wisdom.

To resist it not, is redemption.

 

God dwelleth behind the sun, the devil behind the night. What god bringeth forth out of the light of the devil sucketh into the night. But Abraxas is the world, its becoming and its passing - Upon every gift that cometh from the god-sun the devil layeth his curse.

 

Everything that ye entreat from the god-sun begetteth a deed from the devil.

Everything that ye create with the god-sun giveth effective power to the devil. That is terrible Abraxas.

 

It is the mightiest creature, and in it the creature is afraid of itself.

It is the manifest opposition to the Pleroma and its nothingness.

It is the son's horror of the mother.

It is the mother's love for the son.

It is the delight of the earth and the cruelty of the heavens.

Before its countenance man becometh like stone.

Before it there is no question and no reply.

It is the life of creatura.

It is the operation of distinctiveness.

It is the love of man.

It is the speech of man.

It is the appearance and the shadow of man.

It is illusory reality.

 

Now the dead howled and raged, for they were unperfected.

 

Sermo IV.

 

The dead filled the place murmuring and said; Tell us of gods and devils, accursed one! The god-sun is the highest good, the devil its opposite. Thus have ye two gods. But there are many high and good things and many great evils. Among these are two god-devils; the one is the Burning One, the other the Growing One. The burning one is EROS, who hath the form of flame. Flame giveth light because it consumeth. The growing one is the TREE OF LIFE. It buddeth, as in growing it heapeth up living stuff. Eros flameth up and dieth. But the tree of life groweth with slow and constant increase through unmeasured time. Good and evil are united in the flame. Good and evil are united in the increase of the tree. In their divinity stand life and love opposed.

 

Innumerable as the host of the stars is the number of gods and devils. Each star is a god, and each space that a star filleth is a devil. But the empty-fullness of the whole is the Pleroma. The operation of the whole is Abraxas, to whom only the ineffective standeth opposed. Four is the number of the principal gods, as four is the number of the world's measurements. One is the beginning, the god-sun. Two is Eros; for he bindeth twain together and outspreadeth himself in brightness. Three is the Tree of Life, for it filleth space with bodily forms. Four is the devil, for he openeth all that is closed. All that is formed of bodily nature doth he dissolve; he is the destroyer in whom everything is brought to nothing.

 

For me, to whom knowledge hath been given of the multiplicity and diversity of the good, it is well. But woe unto you, who replace these incompatible many by a single god. For in so doing ye beget the torment which is bred from not understanding, and ye mutilate the creature whose nature and aim is distinctiveness. How can ye be true to your own nature when ye try to change the many into one? What ye do unto the gods is done likewise unto you. Ye all become equal and thus is your nature maimed.

 

Equalities shall prevail not for god, but only for the sake of man. For the gods are many, whilst men are few. The gods are mighty and can endure their manifoldness. For like the stars they abide in solitude, parted one from the other by immense distances. Therefore they dwell together and need communion, that they may bear their separateness. For redemption's sake I teach you the rejected truth, for the sake of which I was rejected.

 

The multiplicity of the gods correspondeth to the multiplicity of man. Numberless gods await the human state. Numberless gods have been men. Man shareth in nature of the gods. He cometh from the gods and goeth unto god. Thus, just as it serveth not to reflect upon the Pleroma, it availeth not to worship the multiplicity of the gods. Least of all availeth it to worship the first god, the effective abundance and the summum bonum.. By our prayer we can add to it nothing, and from it nothing take; because the effective void swalloweth all. The bright gods form the celestial world. It is manifold and infinitely spreading and increasing. The god-sun is the supreme lord of the world. The dark gods form the earth-world. They are simple and infinitely diminishing and declining. The devil is the earth-world's lowest lord, the moon-spirit, satellite of the earth, smaller, colder, and more dead than the earth. There is no difference between the might of the celestial gods and those of the earth. The celestial gods magnify, the earth-gods diminish. Measureless is the movement of both.

 

Sermo V.

 

The dead mocked and cried: Teach us, fool, of the Church and the holy Communion. The world of the gods is made manifest in spirituality and in sexuality. The celestial ones appear in spirituality, the earthly in sexuality. Spirituality conceiveth and embraceth. It is womanlike and therefore we call it MATER COELESTIS, the celestial mother. Sexuality engendereth and createth. It is manlike, and therefore we call it PHALLOS, the earthly father. The sexuality of man is more of the earth, the sexuality of woman is more of the spirit. The spirituality of man is more of heaven, it goeth to the greater. The spirituality of woman is more of the earth, it goeth to the smaller. Lying and devilish is the spirituality of the man which goeth to the smaller. Lying and devilish is the spirituality of the woman which goeth to the greater. Each must go its own place. Man and woman become devils one to the other when they divide not their spiritual ways, for the nature of the creatura is distinctiveness. The sexuality of man hath an earthward course, the sexuality of woman a spiritual. Man and woman becomes devils one to the other if they distinguish not their sexuality. Man shall know of the smaller, woman the greater. Man shall distinguish himself both from spirituality and sexuality. He shall spirituality Mother, and set her between heaven and earth. He shall call sexuality Phallos, and set him between himself and earth. For the Mother and the Phallos are super-human daemons which reveal the world of the gods. They are for us more effective than the gods, because they are closely akin to our own nature. Should ye not distinguish yourselves from sexuality and from spirituality, and not regard them as of a nature born above you and beyond, then are ye delivered over to them as qualities of the Pleroma. Spirituality and sexuality are not your qualities, not things ye possess and contain. But they possess and contain you; for they are powerful daemons, manifestations of the gods, and are, therefore, things which reach beyond you, existing in themselves. No man hath a spirituality unto himself, or a sexuality unto himself. But he standeth under the law of spirituality and of sexuality. No man, therefore, escapeth these daemons. Ye shall look upon them as daemons, and as a common task and danger, a common burden which life hath laid upon you. Thus is life for you also a common task and danger, as are the gods, and first of all terrible Abraxas. Man is weak, therefore is communion indispensable. If your communion be not under the sign of the Mother, then is it under the sign of the Phallos. No communion is suffering and sickness. Communion in everything is dismemberment and dissolution. Distinctiveness leadeth to singleness. Singleness is opposed to communion. But because of man's weakness over against the gods and daemons and their invincible law is communion needful, not for man's sake, but because of the gods. The gods force you to communion. As much as they force you, so much is the communion needed, more is evil. In communion let every man submit to the others, that communion be maintained, for ye need it. In Singleness the one man shall be superior to the others, that every man may come to himself and avoid slavery. In communion there shall be continence. In Singleness there shall be prodigality. Communion is depth. Singleness is height. Right measure in communion purifieth and preserveth. Right measure in Singleness purifieth and increaseth. Communion giveth us warmth, Singleness giveth us light.

 

Sermo VI.

 

The daemons of sexuality approacheth our soul as a serpent. It is half human and appeareth as thought-desire. The daemon of spirituality descendeth into our soul as the white bird. It is half human and appeareth as desire-thought. The Serpent is an earthly soul, half daemonic, a spirit, and akin to the spirits of the dead. Thus too, like these, she swarmeth around in the things of earth, making us either fear them or pricking us with intemperate desires. The Serpent hath a nature like unto woman. She seeketh company of the dead who are held by the spell of the earth, they who found not the way beyond that leadeth to singleness. The Serpent is a whore. She wantoneth with the devil and with evil spirits; a mischievous tyrant and tormentor, ever seducing to evilest company. The White Bird is a half-celestial soul of man. He bideth with the Mother, from time to time descending. The bird hath a nature like unto man, and is effective thought. He is chaste and solitary, a messenger of the Mother. He flieth high above earth. He commandeth singleness. He bringeth knowledge from the distant ones who went before and are perfected. He beareth our word above to the Mother. She intercedeth, she warneth, but against the gods she hath no power. She is a vessel of the sun . The serpent goeth below and with her cunning she lameth the phallic daemon, or else goadeth him on. She yieldeth up the too crafty thoughts of the earthy one, those thoughts which creep through every hole and cleave to all things with desirousness. The Serpent, doubtless, willeth it not, yet she must be of use to us. She fleeth our grasp, thus showing us the way, which with our human wits we could not find.

 

With disdainful glance the dead spake: Cease this talk of gods and daemons and souls. At this hath long been known to us.

 

Sermo VII.

 

Yet when night was come the dead again approached with lamentable mien and said: There is yet one matter we forgot to mention. Teach us about man. Man is a gateway, through which from the outer world of gods, daemons, and souls ye pass into the inner world; out of the greater into the smaller world. Small and transitory is man. Already is he behind you, and once again ye find yourselves in endless space, in the smaller of innermost infinity. At immeasurable distance standeth one single Star in the zenith. This is the one god of this one man. This is his world, his Pleroma, his divinity. In this world is man Abraxas, the creator and destroyer of his one world. This Star is the god and the goal of man. This is his one guiding god. In him goeth man to his rest. Toward him goeth the long journey of the soul after death. In him shineth forth as light all that man bringeth back from the greater world. To this one god man shall pray. Prayer increaseth the light of the Star. It casteth a bridge over death. It prepareth life for the smaller world and assuageth the hopeless desires of the greater. When the greater world waxeth cold, burneth the Star. Between man and his one god there standeth nothing, so long as man can turn away his eyes from the flaming spectacle of Abraxas. Man here, god there. Weakness and nothingness here, there eternally creative power. Here nothing but darkness and chilling moisture. There Wholly Sun.

 

Whereupon the dead were silent and ascended like the smoke above the herdsman's fire, who through the night kept watch over his flock.

 

ANAGRAMMA:

NAHTRIHECCUNDE

GAHINNEVERAHTUNIN

ZEHGESSURKLACH

ZUNNUS

 

Luat de pe:

http://www.freewebs.com/navanath/seven_sermons.html

 

I daca mai esti pe forum ... sunt curios ce parere ai :)

Editat de danutzzz

Partajează acest post


Link spre post
Distribuie pe alte site-uri

Este mult de citit, chiar in romana sa fi fost si tot era mult. Pe mine ma intereseaza, dar e ... :jester:

De ce nu l-ai tradus? :lol2:

sermon inseamna predica.

 

L.E. le-am gasit in italiana, le citesc acolo.

Daca platiti bine, va pun si traducerea in romana 8)

Partajează acest post


Link spre post
Distribuie pe alte site-uri
Este mult de citit, chiar in romana sa fi fost si tot era mult. Pe mine ma intereseaza, dar e ... :kiss:

De ce nu l-ai tradus? :o:

sermon inseamna predica.

 

L.E. le-am gasit in italiana, le citesc acolo.

Daca platiti bine, va pun si traducerea in romana :>

 

Nu le-am tradus pt ca e multa munca si nu prea am avut timp de tradus ... dupa cum vezi nici macar ce inseamna "sermon" nu am cautat :o: (pt mine nu are importanta majora ce insemna un/o sermon, important era continutul)

Partajează acest post


Link spre post
Distribuie pe alte site-uri

Am citit textul. Este o "interpretare" prin asociere , facuta de Carl Jung asupra invataturilor date de BASILIDES , un inititat gnostic-zoroastrian. Gnosticismul se bazeaza pe o cunoastere reala si puternica care produce iluminare datorita reprezentarii , in cele mai multe cazuri , corecta a lumii in care traim. Dar gnosticismul original nu trebuie confundat cu cu gnosticismul-crestinizat si adaptat la "complexul messiah". Gnosticismul original a existat cu mult inainte de "secolele I , II" cand s-a facut evident datorita necesitatii de a combate "noua religie crestina" care ameninta sa distruga orice alt cult. Regula era tacerea , si initiatii mentineau secretele in cadrul cercurilor formate in general din 8 barbati si 8 femei. PLEROMA fiind "centrul de emanatie al Creatiei" este considerat , ca si in alte culturi , ca fiind "incogniscibil" si "nedefinit" , mult prea puternic pentru ca cineva sa se aventureze in a il cunoaste direct , datorita riscului de disolutie al structurii energetice individuale.

 

Din pacate , ceea ce directioneaza acest text este frica lui Jung de a muri si de a se dizolva in incostientul colectiv. Un alta slabiciune a textului , este definirea raului ca fiind vidul. Si identificarea lui Dumnezeu ca fiind ceva separat de Pleroma. Din cate am studiat si experimentat , vidul nu este rau deoarece vidul este forta ce echilibreaza plinul. La fel ca si magnetismul format din - , 0 si +. NU poti considera "-" ca fiind rau si "+" ca fiind bine. Ambele sunt necesare pentru a crea echilibrul emanatiei si al disolutiei. Mai mult , a-l identifica pe Dumnezeu ca fiind o entitate diferentiata fata de Esenta creatiei este o eroare la fel de mare ca si considerarea Creatiei ca fiind munca lui Dumnezeu si nu Dumnezeu insusi.

 

In concluzie , elementele pe care se bazeaza Jung in "textul scris/tradus" de el sunt originale si vin din surse antice. Dar per ansamblu , pentru mine , textul esueaza in a oferi o perspectiva reala asupra existentei.

Editat de Subliminal

Partajează acest post


Link spre post
Distribuie pe alte site-uri
Am citit textul. Este o "interpretare" prin asociere , facuta de Carl Jung asupra invataturilor date de BASILIDES , un inititat gnostic-zoroastrian. Gnosticismul se bazeaza pe o cunoastere reala si puternica care produce iluminare datorita reprezentarii , in cele mai multe cazuri , corecta a lumii in care traim. Dar gnosticismul original nu trebuie confundat cu cu gnosticismul-crestinizat si adaptat la "complexul messiah". Gnosticismul original a existat cu mult inainte de "secolele I , II" cand s-a facut evident datorita necesitatii de a combate "noua religie crestina" care ameninta sa distruga orice alt cult. Regula era tacerea , si initiatii mentineau secretele in cadrul cercurilor formate in general din 8 barbati si 8 femei. PLEROMA fiind "centrul de emanatie al Creatiei" este considerat , ca si in alte culturi , ca fiind "incogniscibil" si "nedefinit" , mult prea puternic pentru ca cineva sa se aventureze in a il cunoaste direct , datorita riscului de disolutie al structurii energetice individuale.

 

Din pacate , ceea ce directioneaza acest text este frica lui Jung de a muri si de a se dizolva in incostientul colectiv. Un alta slabiciune a textului , este definirea raului ca fiind vidul. Si identificarea lui Dumnezeu ca fiind ceva separat de Pleroma. Din cate am studiat si experimentat , vidul nu este rau deoarece vidul este forta ce echilibreaza plinul. La fel ca si magnetismul format din - , 0 si +. NU poti considera "-" ca fiind rau si "+" ca fiind bine. Ambele sunt necesare pentru a crea echilibrul emanatiei si al disolutiei. Mai mult , a-l identifica pe Dumnezeu ca fiind o entitate diferentiata fata de Esenta creatiei este o eroare la fel de mare ca si considerarea Creatiei ca fiind munca lui Dumnezeu si nu Dumnezeu insusi.

 

In concluzie , elementele pe care se bazeaza Jung in "textul scris/tradus" de el sunt originale si vin din surse antice. Dar per ansamblu , pentru mine , textul esueaza in a oferi o perspectiva reala asupra existentei.

 

Interesanta interpretarea ta ...

 

Ce am inteles eu:

El vb despre Dumnezeu ca fiind cel mai mare Zeu "emanat" din Pleroma, impreuna cu opusul sau Diavolul; si ii prezinta ca doua forte opuse "plinul" si "vidul", cum ai zis si tu. Si in alte texte gnostice am vazut o descriere asemanatoare ... si ideea de baza e intoarcerea tuturor zeilor sau oamenilor in Pleroma. Poate Pleroma sa fie Dumnezeul suprem? intreaga creatie?

 

Mai sunt si cei doi god-devils: Eros si Tree of Life, asta ma duce cu gandul la cel mai vechi simbol: Crucea(reprezentata ca semnul plus -> +, adica avand toate bratele egale) Impreuna cei 4 (Dumnezeu, Diavol, Eros, Copacul Vietii) ar simboliza acest "+"

 

O idee de baza in gnosticism este 'Demiurgul' (sau creatorul lumii materiale); un Dumnezeu mai ... "mic" (si numit prost de unele texte gnostice) la acest Dumnezeu cred eu ca se refera Biserica, si cred ca si Biblia .... Jung spune chiar ca exista mai multi Zei ...

 

Despre Diavol nu cred ca se refera la Diavolul la care se refera Biserica, ci chiar la "Forta Vidului" care echilibreaza "Plinul". Diavolul despre care vb Biserica si care ar fi "dusmanul" omului nu este prezentat. Sunt prezentati "Duhul Sfant"(care ar veni de la Dumnezeu) si Sexualitatea(care ar fi mai degraba legata de Diavol); astfel noi oamenii am avea Duhul Sf deasupra (sau spre Dumnezeu) si Sexualitatea dedesubt (sau spre Diavol) DAR NU IN SENSUL IN CARE ZICE BISERICA; ci ca 2 forte care ne guverneaza; Dumnezeu si Diavolul aici fiind primii emanati din Pleroma, nu cei la care face referire Biserica (sau Islamul).

 

Unele elemente de care se vb aici am mai gasit si in alte scrieri gnostice: Pistis Sophia, "Biblia" Mandeeana (corespondentul Bibliei) sau negnostice: The Book of the Law a lui Crowley, deci si eu cred ca provin din surse antice si poate chiar adevarate.

Partajează acest post


Link spre post
Distribuie pe alte site-uri
El vb despre Dumnezeu ca fiind cel mai mare Zeu "emanat" din Pleroma, impreuna cu opusul sau Diavolul; si ii prezinta ca doua forte opuse "plinul" si "vidul", cum ai zis si tu. Si in alte texte gnostice am vazut o descriere asemanatoare ... si ideea de baza e intoarcerea tuturor zeilor sau oamenilor in Pleroma. Poate Pleroma sa fie Dumnezeul suprem? intreaga creatie?

 

Pai asta este si problema. Se refera la Dumnezeu ca la un zeu. De dragul conceptului ce ar trebui sa defineasca Supremul , utilizarea lui in astfel de contexte ar trebui evitata pentru a nu se pierde sensul. Plinul si Vidul nu ar trebui gandite ca zei , ci ca si forte elementare ale Creatiei. Totul este format din trinitatea "-" 0 "+". "-" este forta de pasivizare/incetinire , "+" este forta de activare/accelerare , iar 0 este punctul de referinta Suprem. Din Suprem se pleaca si in Suprem se ajunge , oricand si oriunde.

 

Din cate stiu eu , PLEROMA este denumirea data pentru centrul unei galaxiei. Orice galaxie are un centru din care emana si este vitalizat ciclic , totul. Aceste centre galactice sunt principalele portaluri din care emana creatia definibila/cogniscibila. Dincolo de aceste Plerome , se intinde incogniscibilul/indefinitul/infinitul. Aceasta este cea mai inalta forma a lui Dumnezeu pe care noi o putem percepe. Dar si emanatia este tot Dumnezeu , deoarece este compusa din aceasi Substanta , numai ca Substanta este diferentiata prin noduri magnetice ce formeaza in functie de evolutie , tipare de existenta ( lumi stelare , entitati etc.).

 

Cu toate ca in multe texte gnostice se afirma imposibilitatea existentei unei diferentieri , totusi , multe alte surse de informatie afirma contrariul. De exmplu , Gaia (spiritul planetei Pamant) , este o entitate ce emana din Pleroma , locul in care isi au existenta Aeonii nemuritori. Daca exista acest plural , inseamna ca exista si diferentiere. But who knows?!

 

 

Treaba cu Dumnezeu si Diavol este preluata din Zoroastrism/mazdeism, si nu apartine gnosticismului original.

"Zurvan (Zurvan Akarana). Zeul primordial preteogonic,

Editat de Subliminal

Partajează acest post


Link spre post
Distribuie pe alte site-uri
Pai asta este si problema. Se refera la Dumnezeu ca la un zeu. De dragul conceptului ce ar trebui sa defineasca Supremul , utilizarea lui in astfel de contexte ar trebui evitata pentru a nu se pierde sensul. Plinul si Vidul nu ar trebui gandite ca zei , ci ca si forte elementare ale Creatiei. Totul este format din trinitatea "-" 0 "+". "-" este forta de pasivizare/incetinire , "+" este forta de activare/accelerare , iar 0 este punctul de referinta Suprem. Din Suprem se pleaca si in Suprem se ajunge , oricand si oriunde.

 

Din cate stiu eu , PLEROMA este denumirea data pentru centrul unei galaxiei. Orice galaxie are un centru din care emana si este vitalizat ciclic , totul. Aceste centre galactice sunt principalele portaluri din care emana creatia definibila/cogniscibila. Dincolo de aceste Plerome , se intinde incogniscibilul/indefinitul/infinitul. Aceasta este cea mai inalta forma a lui Dumnezeu pe care noi o putem percepe. Dar si emanatia este tot Dumnezeu , deoarece este compusa din aceasi Substanta , numai ca Substanta este diferentiata prin noduri magnetice ce formeaza in functie de evolutie , tipare de existenta ( lumi stelare , entitati etc.).

 

Cu toate ca in multe texte gnostice se afirma imposibilitatea existentei unei diferentieri , totusi , multe alte surse de informatie afirma contrariul. De exmplu , Gaia (spiritul planetei Pamant) , este o entitate ce emana din Pleroma , locul in care isi au existenta Aeonii nemuritori. Daca exista acest plural , inseamna ca exista si diferentiere. But who knows?!

 

 

Treaba cu Dumnezeu si Diavol este preluata din Zoroastrism/mazdeism, si nu apartine gnosticismului original.

"Zurvan (Zurvan Akarana). Zeul primordial preteogonic,

Partajează acest post


Link spre post
Distribuie pe alte site-uri
Am vazut ca o idee la Mandaeanism (sper ca am scris corect) e ca Isus e un profet fals ... un fel de slujitor al Demiurgului(Yahve/Yaldabaoth), care a "stricat" adevarul si adevarata cunoastere. La fel se zice si despre Mohamed. Faza e ca despre Mahomed se zice inainte de aparitia lui ... O chestie ciudata e si faptul ca sunt mai multe mituri(Mithra e unul din ele) foarte asemanatoare cu "istoria" sau viata lui Isus; adica nastere din fecioara, sacrificat pt salvarea oamanilor, mort 3 zile apoi inviat ... asta mi se pare ciudat ...

 

Mai este o carte Pistis Sophia. Ai citit-o? Ce parere ai?

 

 

Am citit primele 2 carti. Pistis Sophia este un text gnostic crestinizat ( sec. 2 - 3 era noastra ), gasit in manuscrisele de la Nag Hammadi in Egipt. Zic crestinizat , deoarece deviaza mult de la obiectivismul gnostic si insista pe tema salvatorului/complexul messiah. Dar spre deosebire de versiunea gasita in evangheliile crestine , aici Iisus este un messiah cu o misiune directa , ce sfideaza intreaga Ierarhie , de la Pamant pana la Pleroma. Dar sfidarea , datorita puterii unor straturi energetice primite din initierea in Misterul al 24-lea ( cel mai mare mister al universului ... zic ei ) in care detinea cheile de acces ( creatie si distrugere ) a tuturor emanatiilor din Pleroma , este un trick cu interes tot pentru Ierarhie. In text este descrisa Ierarhia , formata din demoni si capetenii de demoni , archoni de toate rangurile de la cei embrionici la cei conducatori de tzeapa lui Yaldabaoth , ingeri si arhangheli puri sau impuri , Aeoni care sunt corupti la nivelul celor mai apropiate ceruri de Pleroma si conduc fals aspectele lumilor emanate din Pleroma... etc. Existenta din perspectiva asta , e plina de hotii si violuri sufletesti , in care banul este energia/spiritul , tocmai datorita nenumaratelor forturi guvernatoare in care se strange energia furata pentru a domina.

 

In viziunea cartii , dincolo de toate paturile ierarhiei (la nivel de galaxie , zic eu ) exista 24 de trepte in care este revelat Misterul Universului la diferite intensitati. Cea mai mare , este intensitatea din care cica ar emana Iisus , intensitate care e guvernata de toti initiatii in ultimul Mister. In functie de mersul lucrurilor se pare ca unii dintre ei coordoneaza Ierarhia , deci sunt un fel de "ochi" ca in simbolul noii ordini mondiale ... piramida cu ochiul atotvazator. Ceea ce incearca textul sa indoctrineze , se rezuma in esenta la a dicta sufletului participant sa accepte ideea unui salvator , care sa poata manipula paturile aeonice si archonice , si pe care sa il urmeze aproape orbeste pentru a isi gasi salvarea.

 

Zicand cele de mai sus , afirm de fapt ca acel Iisus este acelasi tipar de messiah , care este trimis pentru a linisti spiritele care se revolta fata de Ierarhia , dar doar pentru a le linisti revolta in asa fel incat sa nu mai doreasca distrugerea Ierarhiei corupte. Intrega istorie este plina de situatia salvatorului , in care , datorita exagerii puterii de care dispune Ierarhia se fac presiuni prea mari asupra maselor de suflete din diferite lumi , si acestea cauta sa se revolte pentru a restabili Principiul Egalitatii care este LEGE a Existentei. Asta e si problema universurilor , ca se ajunge la momentul crearii Ierarhiilor care domineaza tot sau aproape tot , si aceasta dominatie blocheaza respiratia naturala a Divinului , in care Dumnezeu Absolut emana si se transforma neincetat pentru a activa Potentialul Infinit.

 

Diferenta dintre modelul Ierarhiei si modelul Egalitatii Divine , este ca in primul , sufletele trebuie sa se conformeze unui sistem si sa depuna efort in castigul/profitul sistemului pentru a se eleva si a atinge nivele din ce in ce mai mari ale potentialului sau. Dar sistemul ierarhic prin care trecc , este doar una dintre "Interpretarile" emanatiei Divinului ... doar un aranjament de miscari posibile. Deci exista acea urcare din locul Prezent inspre regiunea celei "mai mari" puritati , pentru a atinge Dumnezeul Absolut. Viziunea este gresita , deoarece adevarata Existenta este egal infinita in toate punctele sale (modelul Egalitatii , MicroCosmos=MacroCosmos). Prin urmare , Dumnezeul Absolut trebuie "activat" in orice punct al Creatiei , datorita faptului ca orice punct al Creatiei este Dumnezeu Absolut si orice forma de existenta are acces DIRECT la cea mai mare puritate. Tocmai si asta e dorinta suprema , activarea Dumnezeului Absolut oriunde si nu doar in anumite noduri energetice "guvernate" de Ierarhii.

 

 

Din perspectiva mea , Pistis Sophia este o dogmatizare a principiilor obiective gasite in gnosticismul nemurdarit de complexul messiah ( cel gasit cu mult inainte de povestea Iisus , poate cateva mii de ani ).

 

 

Acest complex Messiah , este folosit constant pentru a oferi alternativa iluzorie a salvarii. Singura salavare reala e activarea potentialului interior , in care mestru este Esenta Constiintei si nu un maestru exterior fata de care exista supunere. Sunt alte ramuri gnostice , care acuza complexul messiah ca venind tot de la archoni sau prin archoni. Una dintre primele secte ce au acceptat influenta messiah este secta Zaddikim , o secta iudaica de langa Marea Moarta.

 

daca te intereseaza aparitia complexului messiah ... zaddikim este exemplul perfect ... http://www.metahistory.org/lexicon_Z.php

 

Oricum , fata de amaratele de evanghelii gasite in Noul Testament , Pistis Sophia si alte manuscrise gnostic-crestine sunt o adevarata doza de completare a cunostintelor despre umanitate. Pentru ca dincolo de manipulare se poate recunoste adevarul nemurdarit.

Partajează acest post


Link spre post
Distribuie pe alte site-uri

pai de ce crezi ca au fost bagate doar 4 evanghelii (si alea modificate si rasmodificate) si restu declarate apocrife ? vezi doamne alea nu erau inspirate de duhul sfant :crazy:

Partajează acest post


Link spre post
Distribuie pe alte site-uri

Creează un cont sau autentifică-te pentru a adăuga comentariu

Trebuie să fi un membru pentru a putea lăsa un comentariu.

Creează un cont

Înregistrează-te pentru un nou cont în comunitatea nostră. Este simplu!

Înregistrează un nou cont

Autentificare

Ai deja un cont? Autentifică-te aici.

Autentifică-te acum

×