I do not have time to go fully into the matter right now. But it was a combination of simple human lust for control and power over others with a darker spiritual force that the Gnostics mistakenly attributed to their Demiurge. An actual Celestial force of inertia had its ‘invisible hand’ in the process, which leads one side of the very real “War in Heavenâ€.
Sorry so little to say about this now. Shall expand over time…
In every material universe, the motion of a particle in a preferential reference frame Φ is determined by the action of forces whose total vanished for all times when and only when the velocity of the particle is constant in Φ. That is, a particle initially at rest or in uniform motion in the preferential frame Φ continues in that state unless compelled by forces to change it
conditionality is a booby trap. yet there is a WAY out.i have nothing to say about “morality” and "norms. i can’t completely agree nor reject it, leonard. some of them are beneficial while some of them are upside down.
this issue is very complex according to gnosticism/buddhism, i dare not speak it in the open because in reality, things are not as we see.
Please explain, Luminuous…
only after attaining GNOSIS will we understand exactly which actions are wholesome & which ones are not...
Do you claim you have transcended conditionality/karma/cause and effect?
for instance, gnosticism & buddhism teach that refraining from carnality is good for your salvation. only those who have attained the Direct Knowledges ("jnana") of where beings are getting reborn due to their "wholesome" or "unwholesome" actions.nope. not yet. but fortunately since i used to serve them as a translator during long samatha retreats, i get these insights from those who have attained it.
These would be perfect beings then. Please name them.
these transcendental knowledges can be verified, leonard. Personally i completely have nothing against sex, yet if enlightened beings with their verifiable knowledges & supernormal abilities teach us about its danger, then i think there's nothing wrong with following their instructions.Nope. not yet. to attain the Ultimate Perfection will take you many countless of aeons.
these supernormal knowledges are yet enough to deliver from the cycle of ignorant becoming. somehow it really matters to me of knowing where i will go after this life (& also where i came from).
buddhism admits that it shares many points with the morality practice presented in major theistic religions. yet buddhism/gnosticism rejects such a thing as “Providence” & the existence of an omnipotent entity.
Contrary to what creationists / theists believe, modern science (Einstein’s Relativity) & Buddhism postulated that time & space are finite yet beginningless.
Time and space is not God.
Transcendental knowledge is verifiable, but freedom from conditionallity is not while on Earth, in my experience. Please attempt to show otherwise.
as in?so what then, is this your definition of “God”?
It's funny because I was about to make a group entry asking precisely if there's any empirical way to argue for morality unless the idea of the existence of the soul is first accepted as true. Ties in nicely with that Huxley quote.
The Dharmakaya/Nirvana/the Primoridal Unborn Mind (modern physics: Energy) which is the absolute & the Monad is sometimes misunderstood by theists as "God".
Per the Kolbrin Luminous:" Before the beginning there was only one consciousness, that of The Eternal One whose nature cannot be expressed in words. It was The One Sole Spirit, The Self Generator which cannot diminish. The Unknown, Unknowable One brooding solitary in profound pregnant silence.
The name which is uttered cannot be that of this Great Being who, remaining nameless, is the beginning and the end, beyond time, beyond the reach of mortals, and we in our simplicity call it God.
He who preceded all existed alone in His strange abode of uncreated light, which remains ever unextinguishable, and no understandable eye can ever behold it. The pulsating draughts of the eternal life light in His keeping were not yet loosed. He knew Himself alone, He was uncontrasted, unable to manifest in nothingness, for all within His Being was unexpressed potential.
The Great Circles of Eternity were yet to be spun out, to be thrown forth as the endless ages of existence in substance. They were to begin with God and return to Him completed in infinite variety and expression. "
Correct. The World itself & its conditionality & natural laws are all immoral. And since beings have no such a thing as an inherent permanent identity ('soul'), morality can only be defined subjectively/relatively.Time & Space, according to Einstein is spherical, rather than flat. If you shoot a bullet with infinite power to the outer space, it will arrive from the opposite end. Practically speaking, this time & space inhabits nowhere and as such it can not even exist in the first place. 8)
Likewise in the sutras time is graphically depicted by the Awakened One as likened to a ball of yarn.
It seems to me this whole reality is some sort of mental projection, it is real to us in every sense but it may be of a nature similar to a dream but much more powerful. That's my hunch, some sort of very powerful mentally created simulation.
i happen to have this interesting video from modern science which might confound those who've never heard about shunyatta: NOVA: THE RACE FOR ABSOLUTE ZERO. It is called the "Bode-Einstein Condensate" where scientists are trying to figure out what the primordial condition of this Universe may look like. I was even amazed that the truth about non-self of all phenomena can now even be seen with our naked eye. 8)
Luminous, how does your gnostic stance reconciles itself with your lack of belief in a conscious creator of all?
EXACTLY, Manuel, Exactly. You have observed correctly.nope. actually i didn’t say that there is no such a thing as a conscious creator.
what i keep saying is that being a creator of sth does not make you omnipotent, benevolent, not least omniscient.
actually this is the moralistic problem faced nowadays by clone scientists: whether creating sth whose destiny is beyond their control is morally right or wrong?
then comes the BIG “heretical” QUESTION: whether the Creation of our present world is morally right or wrong? the simple answer is that if sth amounts to bringing suffering to others, then it must be morally WRONG.
Pain & suffering is evil. It is the ultimate immorality according to buddhistic/gnostic view.
Theistic Religions in advanced/civilized society have all proven to be a complete FAILURE when trying to explain why is SEXUALITY bad/wrong? Naturally, a Creationist will question: if it feels good, how can it be so wrong? This in turn creates a major confusion in all these religions. They’ve been seeking an explanation for it only to find none. 8)
Well in regards to the Kolbrin this is explained in the following way:“Though men may despair because I am veiled from them, though they may seek without finding, I am not indifferent to their needs and desires. Doubt and uncertainty are essential earthly conditions serving a definite end. I have not surrounded men with perplexities and obscurities unnecessarily. The climate of unbelief and materialism, strange though it may seem to men, is best for their spiritual health. I know better than men themselves what is best for them, for I alone can see the broad design spread over the ages, I alone see the end and objective. Though unenlightened men expect it, it is not meet for Me to interfere unduly in the affairs of Earth”.
