Some Angellousian Thoughts on Gnosticism (Earth, gospel, mysticism, beliefs)

[yuvgotmel]

He made them a place of this sort and a school of this sort for doctrine and for form.

“A Valentinian Exposition (XI, 2),” Line 37

On or around April 23rd, 2007, my son asked me a question that he had been pondering. He said, “If I have negative 5 pencils in my hand, and you hand me 2 pencils, how many pencils will I have in my hand?”

The answer is 28 (= 2 “real ones” and 26 “non-real ones”), so I have been told by a scientist, who explained that the answer comes from the understanding and calculation of light polarization, a kaleidoscope-like reality, vector mirroring, holographic logic, morphogenic fields and so on.

The span from -5 to +2 is 7. Both sides of the scale (being here negative and positive) must be used to solve the problem (given above). Therefore, the span of 7 is added together from its negative and positive (sides): -7 + 7 = 14. The 14 is then added to itself to equal 28, leaving 2 “real” things and 26 prism-like “non-real” things. And in this case, the answer 28 has a square root of 5.2915026221291811810032315072785, which happens to reflect the original integers from the equation: -5 and +2. This is the creation of form.

[That] Tetrad [projected the Tetrad which is the one consisting of] Word and [Life and Man and] Church. [Now the Uncreated One] projected Word and Life. Word is [for] the glory of the Ineffable One while Life is for the glory of Truth. This, then, is the [Tetrad] begotten according to [the likeness] of the Uncreated (Tetrad). And [the] Tetrad is begotten [ … the Decad (i.e., ten)] from [Word and Life] and the Dodecad (i.e., twelve) from Man], and [Church became a] Triacontad (i.e., thirty). [Moreover], it is the one [from the Triacontad] of the [Aeons who bear fruit] from [the Triacontad]. [They] enter [jointly but they] come forth [singly, fleeing from] the Aeons [and the Uncontainable Ones. And] the Uncontainable Ones, [once they had] looked [at him, glorified Mind] since [he is an Uncontainable One that exists] in the [Pleroma].

[But the Decad] from Word and Life brought forth decades so as to make the Pleroma become a hundred, and the Dodecad from Man and Church [brought] forth and [made] the Triacontad so as to make [the three] hundred sixty become the Pleroma of the year.

“A Valentinian Exposition (XI, 2),” Lines 29~30

“[But the Decad] from Word and Life brought forth decades so as to make the Pleroma become a hundred” is the word problem equivalent to 10 squared. And “the Dodecad,” which equals 12, is then multiplied by “the Triacontad,” which equals 30, to get the sum of 360 (the equivalent of the degrees in a circle).

Notice that the writer of the Valentinian Exposition makes careful mention of what is “begotten” (i.e., “real” vs. “non-real”). “And [the] Tetrad is begotten” …. It is interesting that the calculations made in this Exposition use integers that avoid the number 0, even though it was known and yet feared by the ancient Greeks, especially by Pythagoras and Aristotle. However, it seems as though, from these writings (above) that the Gnostics circumvented the necessity for the 0 in their calculations by substituting language that appears more similar to Kabbalistic and Eastern teachings (expressly from India); and it also shows a precursor to the Arabic-born algebra.

Ah, “sacred geometry” (and the number “0”) where the Catholic Church and science split!

“The fact that the zero-point field is the lowest energy states makes it unobservable. We see things by way of contrast. The eye works by letting light fall on the otherwise dark retina. But if the eye were filled with light, there would be no darkness to afford a contrast. The zero-point field is such a blinding light. Since it is everywhere, inside and outside of us, permeating every atom in our bodies, we are effectively blind to it. It blinds us to its presence.”

“The brain selects specific sets of the frequencies out of this vibrating blur and transforms them into sensory perceptions, and abracadabra, our objective reality exists. But what if one could focus attention on the de-localized aspect of self, then what would he or she perceive? …As the ancient religions of the East have long upheld, the material world is Maya, an illusion. True Reality is emptiness. Consider the following quote in What is Life, from the theoretical Austrian physicist Erwin Schrodinger, co-discoverer with Heisenburg of quantum mechanics, “Consciousness is never experienced in the plural, only in the singular. How does the idea of plurality arise at all? …the only possible alternative is simply to keep the immediate experience that consciousness is a singular of which the plural is unknown; that there is only one thing and that what seems to be a plurality is merely a series of different aspects of this one thing …”.”

“The Silent Gospel,” by James Barrett, pp. 202~203

The Gnostics appear to be tackling two related concepts: math and consciousness—expressly where form is derived, with language indicative of a deeply spiritual/mystical nature. “The Gospel of Philip,” Line 78 describes it this way:

“The children a woman bears resemble the man who loves her. If her husband loves her, then they resemble her husband. If it is an adulterer, then they resemble the adulterer. Frequently, if a woman sleeps with her husband out of necessity, while her heart is with the adulterer with whom she usually has intercourse, the child she will bear is born resembling the adulterer.”

(This concept, to the best of my knowledge, is repeated in Islamic mysticism.) “The Gospel of Philip,” then, goes on to describe the effect of light (specifically the mystical aspects of the spiritual realm), as mentioned from the excerpt above from “The Silent Gospel”:

“So spirit mingles with spirit, and thought consorts with thought, and [light] shares [with light. If you (sg.)] are born a human being, it is [the human being] who will love you. If you become [a spirit], it is the spirit which will be joined to you. If you become thought, it is thought which will mingle with you. If you become light, it is the light which will share with you.”

“The Gospel of Philip,” Lines 78~79

The particular mystical aspects of the intermingling of spirits are similar to Kabbalism, which was most likely taught among the Essenes. A study in Alchemy, especially Sexual Alchemy, would go into greater detail about the union of spirit and form.

From the “A Valentinian Exposition (XI, 2),”: “[They] enter [jointly but they] come forth [singly, fleeing from] the Aeons [and the Uncontainable Ones.” And “The Gospel of Philip” similarly describes it this way:

Bridal Chamber and Androgyny

Among the forms of unclean spirits are male
and female ones. Males have sex with souls
who inhabit a female shape,
and females mingle promiscuously with souls
in a male form. No one escapes those spirits:
they seize you, unless you take on the power
of male or female, of groom and bride.
This power resides in the mirrored bridal chamber.
When wanton women see a man sitting alone,
the man is overcome. They fondle him
and pollute him. When wanton men see
a beautiful woman sitting alone, they overcome her,
and she is violated and polluted.
But when spirits see a man and his wife sitting together,
the female spirits cannot enter the male, nor the male
the woman. When the image and angel are joined,
none can force themselves on the man and woman.

“The Gospel of Philip” from “The Gnostic Bible” page 275

To get back to the original thought: it is possible that the Greeks were aware that our three-dimensional reality is an illusion/perception of our making. However, in the Aristotlian view, such things were simply denied, in exchange for a finite concept of God and the cosmos. It seems as though the Gnostics were truly against the grain and radically ahead of their time.


Bibliography:

• “A Valentinian Exposition,” excerpted from “The Nag Hammadi Library in English,” by James M. Robinson, General Editor, Publisher: HarperSanFranciso, paperback edition, 1990
• “Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea” by Charles Seife, Publisher: Penguin Books, paperback, 2000
• “The Silent Gospel,” by James Barrett, Publisher: Silent Gospel Publishing, paperback, 2006
• “The Gospel of Philip,” excerpted from “The Nag Hammadi Library in English,” by James M. Robinson, General Editor, Publisher: HarperSanFranciso, paperback edition, 1990
• “The Gospel of Philip” from “The Gnostic Bible,” Edited by Willis Barnstone & Marvin Meyer, Publisher: Shambala Boston & London, 2003

Additions:
Zero was at the heart of the battle between East and West. Zero was at the center of the struggle between religion and science. Zero became the language of nature and the most important tool in mathematics. ...

“Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea” by Charles Seife, pp. 2~3


It is hard to image being afraid of a number. Yet zero was inexorably linked with the void—with nothing. There was a primal fear of void and chaos. There was also a fear of zero.

“Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea” by Charles Seife, p. 19

[yuvgotmel]

Where's my Frubals for doing your homework???

[Halcyon]

The Valentinians were just describing the fullness, pleroma, of God. How God is total and complete, the full 360 degrees of the circle. There is no zero because there is nothing but God.

[yuvgotmel]

Originally Posted by yuvgotmel

“If I have negative 5 pencils in my hand, and you hand me 2 pencils, how many pencils will I have in my hand?”

The answer is 28 (= 2 “real ones” and 26 “non-real ones”), so I have been told by a scientist, who explained that the answer comes from the understanding and calculation of light polarization, a kaleidoscope-like reality, vector mirroring, holographic logic, morphogenic fields and so on.

The span from -5 to +2 is 7. Both sides of the scale (being here negative and positive) must be used to solve the problem (given above). Therefore, the span of 7 is added together from its negative and positive (sides): -7 + 7 = 14. The 14 is then added to itself to equal 28, leaving 2 “real” things and 26 prism-like “non-real” things. And in this case, the answer 28 has a square root of 5.2915026221291811810032315072785, which happens to reflect the original integers from the equation: -5 and +2. This is the creation of form.

I wanted to clarify something that was not well-explained in the original post.

Therefore, the span of 7 is added together from its negative and positive

This answer is considered to be 0. However, what needs to be clarified is that the span of 7 is being calculated on both sides of the number line to create a prism-like effect--thus "form" (i.e., an illusion of "continuous symmetry").

And, no matter what the diameter of a circle is, there will always be 360 degrees. The circle (and sphere) is able to expand and contract.

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by yuvgotmel

Where's my Frubals for doing your homework???

hahahahaha

I am on quite a different track.

[doppelgänger]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

Because Philip's cosmology is based on Plato's Timaeus which uses a Pythagorean method.

It's possible that the author(s) of Philip internalized Plato's Pythagorean method in an independent construction of his own cosmology. I can't tell yet if Philip simply replaces variables in the formula or if he simply uses something similar.

There may be an example of this in the Canonical gospels, as well, which also tracks the Timaeus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch_of_153_fish

I haven't dug into it enough to tell if there's really anything to it though.

[michel]

Originally Posted by yuvgotmel

I wanted to clarify something that was not well-explained in the original post.

Therefore, the span of 7 is added together from its negative and positive

This answer is considered to be 0. However, what needs to be clarified is that the span of 7 is being calculated on both sides of the number line to create a prism-like effect--thus "form" (i.e., an illusion of "continuous symmetry").

And, no matter what the diameter of a circle is, there will always be 360 degrees. The circle (and sphere) is able to expand and contract.

Ah, of course, a Kabbalist ! (forgive the OFF topic)

I like the above. I am trying to compare Numerology to the Tarot, to find out which numerological system is the "right" one.

[yuvgotmel]

Originally Posted by michel

Ah, of course, a Kabbalist ! (forgive the OFF topic)

I like the above. I am trying to compare Numerology to the Tarot, to find out which numerological system is the "right" one.

I don't really have an answer for that, at this time. So I will tell you what I know/feel. From Aleister Crowley's work, I believe that he probably could have tapped deep into the collective consciousness to produce his Tarot cards. However, I do not own a set of those and have never worked with them. I personally like a Kabbalistic deck that I have which the Master Cards (i.e., Major Arcana correspond with the 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet). It is the "I Am One" tarot: http://saint-art.com/product_info.ph...0f9e895d367725

I also use a more traditional deck, which is recommended by Donald Michael Kraig in this very excellent book "Modern Magick: Second Edition, Eleven Lessons in the High Magickal Arts".

There are plenty of people who will tell you the "right" deck for you is the one that you feel most comfortable with. Yet, I do believe that a good deck should appropriately reveal the symbols without the need for much training per se, because theoretically they should speak to your subconscious and reveal their meanings (with relative ease). That's my opinion.

I also suggest another system that I use, which is based on regular playing cards. The system is said to be handed down from Atlantis. It is probably the most accurate "fortune-telling" system that I have seen. The premise of it is slightly different than Tarot, and supposedly predates the Tarot. http://7thunders.com/index.php?test=1 (As an aside, I have had the pleasure of meeting Robert Lee Camp--author of the website at link--when he lived in Asheville, North Carolina. I attended his birthday party just last year!)