oh god. where is this dangerous copypasta coming from? I never gave a second though to such stuff, but last 2 frames made me to lose my religion. again. frick
It makes no sense. They say Jesus is the good guy but then when he incarnates he doesn't mention any of this stuff? Also Adam and Eve were happy, they ate the fruit and everything turned worse. None of this adds up.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Well... if you want to be Gnostic you'd have to follow the Nag Hammadi Library
http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhlcodex.html
The Nag Hammadi Library is a bit like the Dead Sea Scrolls, in that provides different narratives and contexts then the Bible as we know it
Which is true? Who knows
The Gnostic gospels all come from the Nag Hammadi Library and it's claimed in them that Jesus teaches some (or perhaps all) of this Gnostic stuff
read Against Heresies by st Irenaeus, he completely debunks all the gnostics. That picture is 100% a fanfiction and is about as based in reality as manicheism or marcionism
tnx on info.
When i was reading Alexandria Quartet, there was quite a word salad referenced to kabbalah, hermetism, coptic church, etc, mostly because of "whole alexandrian misticism" scene.
I tried to do some reading but eventually discarded it all off as a BS.
Without this low-down i would off forget all them larpers from Alexandria Quartet.
read Against Heresies by st Irenaeus, he completely debunks all the gnostics. That picture is 100% a fanfiction and is about as based in reality as manicheism or marcionism
brainlets still don't understand that eve is the christian version of sophia
christ was NOT the snake on the tree, christ is the guy on the cross no matter what, coming to this world to give us an instruction manual to get out if we so choose, this can not happen without the fall occurring first, the fall is not the spark
Gnostic isn't a sect like Lutheran or Mormon. It's an umbrella term for bunch of sects in the early church. Saying one thing is true for all Gnostics is like saying Anglican beliefs hold for Pentecostals.
Some Gnostic texts do indeed have Christ in the role of the snake. People like to focus on the most wild Gnostic stories, mostly those from The Apocryphon of John and The Hypostasis of the Archons (the evil Yaldaboath in the Garden, the gang rape of Eve by Yaldaboath and his Archons, etc.). But many Gnostics didn't hold to this.
John is arguably a Gnostic book and it is Canon. Orgien and other Patristics who had a huge influence on the mainline church were Gnostics. A Gnostic was almost Pope. Gnosticism was often not its own sect, but a special study group within existing churches for people who wanted to go deeper.
You can either define Gnostic narrowly as any Christian or israeli sect with a demiurge narrative, or more broadly as those which had Christ as bestowing humanity with a path to enlightenment and special inner knowledge of God. Christian reincarnation theology normally gets pooled in with the term Gnostic.
A lot of material on the Gnostics is shit because until recently we only had.
A. Heretic hunters descriptions of Gnostic teachings, which we now know are bad straw men.
B. Bits and pieces that survived, often blended with esoteric traditions making it harder to tell what historically went with what.
Kenoma is absolutely, 100%, insanely batshit furious about having stuff in it, because the presence of that stuff inflicted on it the ability to comprehend that it contains stuff, and it's incredibly pissed about having contents, properties, and indeed any sort of awareness. This is a situation that I feel most Gnostic discussion neglects.
Take
[...]
[...]
Here you go, friends
for reference. There are things in the shape of Man devoid of any shred of divinity, even further "below" hylics. They are matter which emulates Man, the ultimate product of the Demiurge's hubris, and his eventual downfall. They are the most absolute form of sociopathy. Through their empty eyes, the knowledge of Being (both Pleroma and the false world) shone into the void and forced it to take shape around this knowledge. One of these empty vessels, piloted by the will of Nothing, is eventually going to violently dismember the Demiurge and throw the bloody scraps back into Pleroma, then wag its finger at Existence for failing to contain itself.
>anyone I disagree with
No just the self-awareness avoidant gays who wax verbose about affirming life as they piss away yet another day on IQfy (like the rest of us). Cope, pseud.
I like these things as exercises, like thought experiments. I don't like when people act as if any of this can be pinned down this definitely. The classic ideas about God etc aren't as arbitrary. We can argue logically about the world up to a point but you can't make many convincing arguments about the stuff that came before everything you use to argue existed.
>In the latest episode of Seinfeld, George is granted the powers of the Demiurge. He tries to make the world a better place, but hilariously, everything he does causes more suffering.
>[INT. JERRY'S APARTMENT] >GEORGE: I'm gonna get rid of death, Jerry! No one dies anymore!
[KRAMER AND JERRY LOOK AT EACH OTHER IN CONFUSION]
Jerry: What do you mean, no one dies anymore?
George: No one dies. No more death.
Jerry: What about car accidents?
George: They still happen, but everyone lives.
Jerry: So people are just getting mangled for no reason now?
George: No, no, no. The hospitals will be able to fix them.
Jerry: So everyone's just going to the hospital all the time?
George: Yes! And it'll be free!
Jerry: So the hospitals are always full and there's never a bed available?
George:No, the hospitals will be bigger.
Jerry: So the government is just going to keep building hospitals until there's one on every block?
George: Well, maybe not every block. But definitely a lot more than there are now.
Jerry: And what about old age? People are just going to live forever?
George: Yes!
Jerry: So the population is just going to keep growing and growing until the whole world is one big city?
George: Well, maybe not the whole world. But definitely a lot of it.
Jerry: And what are people going to do for work?
George: I don't know. Maybe they'll all be doctors.
Jerry: So everyone's a doctor?
George: Well, maybe not everyone. But definitely a lot of people.
Jerry: And what about food? Everyone's just going to eat at the hospital?
George: No, no, no. There will be restaurants.
Jerry: So the restaurants are always full and there's never a table available?
Somehow I don't think it's a coincidence that the dead sea scrolls and the nag hammadi texts were discovered so close together immediately after the war.
>thinks that gnosticism just means spending years in contemplation and letting your body wither until death takes you and hopefully leads you to pleroma
Every human being not going to the extreme limits is the servant or the enemy of man and an accomplice of nameless obscenity.
I train both mind and body so I can beat up the false god in every way.
If the Demiurge is responsible for the flawed material world, and the Monad's emanations eventually begat the Demiurge, then the Monad is ultimately responsible for the flawed material world.
Emanation isn’t a thing that the Monad has to “do”; it just happens as a consequence of the Monad being so ineffable and infinite that it’s thought literally overflows beyond infinity itself and produces the emanations automatically
God isn’t personified in Gnosticism as hard as He is in standard Christianity, He isn’t like an architect that goes about putting cosmos together because He has literally no reason to when He’s already perfect - the lowest emanation, Sophia, is responsible for the Demiurge, but unlike the God of Nicene Christianity she doesn’t try to shirk responsibility for it and repents of her mistake
But that doesn't solve anything. The Monad, by its very nature, produces a chain of emanations whose end is a flawed material world. You can ascribe ineffability and perfect beauty and infinity to it all you want but it doesn't change that fact. The Christian God deliberately created the world and may have had a purpose for allowing it to exist in its fallen state, but the Monad can't help itself from breathing into existence the pleroma and all that followed. It's just as responsible, maybe even more so since it creates ultimately flawed things by nature rather than by choice.
You're thinking about it all wrong. The Monad is infinite, all possibility. There is no evil in it because all things are balanced by their opposite. Fear exists inside the Monad but it balanced by calm, heat by cold, etc., all elements of experience.
The Pleroma is still perfect because the Aeons are all in a harmonious balance (Heraclitus' ontology of the tension of opposites is partly an inspiration).
Our world is flawed because it isn't in balance.
The Monad is the cause of all that is, but talking about It being somehow personally responsible for the material world is like saying a vial of hydrogen gas is guilty of sloth, it makes no sense. There is no personified context for ethics to apply in.
2 years ago
Anonymous
How the Monad emanates through the Barbelõ is mysterious. Based on the ogdoad's legacy in esoterica, it's possible to see emanations occurring for the same reason Boheme has God creating: contradiction.
Having just one thing, the Monad, is contradictory. There is nothing to define the Monad, it has no meaning. It's like the information content of an infinite string of 1s. Meaning requires difference.
Non-contradiction requires emanation.
2 years ago
Anonymous
How the Monad emanates through the Barbelõ is mysterious. Based on the ogdoad's legacy in esoterica, it's possible to see emanations occurring for the same reason Boheme has God creating: contradiction.
Having just one thing, the Monad, is contradictory. There is nothing to define the Monad, it has no meaning. It's like the information content of an infinite string of 1s. Meaning requires difference.
Non-contradiction requires emanation.
I haven't read enough on this tension of opposites stuff to properly respond to your post at this time, but thanks for offering something of substance to think about in response to my objections. I've brought this issue up in gnostic threads for months and never received a serious answer.
I'll see you in a future thread.
But this is all just Valentinus, though. None of these arguments apply to Mani, to Marcion, to the Sethians, to Basilides in his early phase, not even to more contemporary systems like Rosario's or even Lindsay.
>The Monad, by its very nature, produces a chain of emanations whose end is a flawed material world.
Plotinus has some good arguments about this sort of thing. Its perfect nature makes it all giving, and its better for there to be a chain of flawed imitations of the monad then nothing else at all. Perfection still gets to shine through deeper layers.
I've updated the Gnostic chart. This is a chart for temperamental, as opposed to scholarly, Gnosticism, so some of the selections are bound to be idiosyncratic, though I've tried to balance them with the more traditional scholarly stuff. Eckhart is on the list because he is a thinker of radical immanence.
I consider Walker somewhat compromised (he's an emanationist), but his book is still compelling. Enjoy.
Lately I've been waking up in the middle of the night with a feeling of claustrophobic despair and fear, at times even asking myself if I was about to go into some kind of psychotic break. After hours of waiting it out I eventually become exhausted and fall asleep, and it's gone by the time I wake up. I've never had that before, I've had difficult nights but nothing that intense, and never this regularly. I'm starting to think psychic parasitism is real in a worryingly literal sense.
... I don't know if I'd recommend benzos, that sounds pretty dangerous
I said psychologist too, maybe you can talk things out with a good one
2 years ago
Anonymous
It does, I don't want to numb myself with pills. >psychologist
I don't think getting too deep into this shit with someone who decides whether or not I can be considered sane is a good idea.
2 years ago
Anonymous
A therapist or a psychologist cant have you committed unless you intend to kill someone or become violent or dangerous
Plus you have patient confidentiality
2 years ago
Anonymous
>A therapist or a psychologist cant have you committed unless you intend to kill someone or become violent or dangerous
or suicide ideation. also dangerous is completely subjective.
im not the guy but im tired of people who dont see the deeply wrong thing that is a carachter in society who decide who is mentally sane and who is not based in whatever mental theory.
2 years ago
Anonymous
You'd have to give an example of someone unreasonably being committed recently
Your line of reasoning so far doesn't make sense without a real example
Because I haven't heard of any of this, you cannot be forcefully committed over just simple suicidal ideation these days
2 years ago
Anonymous
iirc only psychiatrists are handled by my health plan and I can't afford paying out of my own pocket for now.
Describe this feeling in more detail.
I feel suffocated by a deep anxiety whose origin I can't pinpoint. I become paranoid that I'm going to lose myself, not exactly lose control over my actions because it doesn't feel like dysphoric mania, but I feel like something inside my mind is disconnecting and that I'm in danger of losing touch with reality and with others. I feel a tension, a ball of stress and the prospect of it just blowing up at some point and driving me into some kind of breakdown reinforces the fear.
It's difficult to describe.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>iirc only psychiatrists are handled by my health plan and I can't afford paying out of my own pocket for now.
Psychiatrists are the most expensive, if they are covered then so should anything below
But if that is the case, then just move to California wear everything is free
2 years ago
Anonymous
I'm not american and no, only psychiatrists are covered because only they are medical doctors
2 years ago
Anonymous
Well thats a shame, maybe find a good psychiatrist that is willing to only talk, I have personally experienced those
iirc only psychiatrists are handled by my health plan and I can't afford paying out of my own pocket for now.
[...]
I feel suffocated by a deep anxiety whose origin I can't pinpoint. I become paranoid that I'm going to lose myself, not exactly lose control over my actions because it doesn't feel like dysphoric mania, but I feel like something inside my mind is disconnecting and that I'm in danger of losing touch with reality and with others. I feel a tension, a ball of stress and the prospect of it just blowing up at some point and driving me into some kind of breakdown reinforces the fear.
It's difficult to describe.
Also, it just feels like things are not the same as they used to be. That I'm not the same. Like something inside me might have changed for the worst, that my view of reality has shifted without my knowing, and the idea fills me with dread
you cant just leave us hanging....
I looked it up and there's no part 2 baka
Read the bible
It's terrible that I prefer consuming "information" in via such a format
Here you go, friends
Literal fiction
Even a tale of the Demiurge serves the demiurge
So you are correct, these stories are more like parables to ponder in a gnostic canon
reddit
oh god. where is this dangerous copypasta coming from? I never gave a second though to such stuff, but last 2 frames made me to lose my religion. again. frick
>his "faith" was destroyed by a reddit comic
https://archive.4plebs.org/x/thread/19127133
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinus_(Gnostic)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nag_Hammadi_library
I really wouldn't worry about this stuff too much, it's all just something meant to be considered
It makes no sense. They say Jesus is the good guy but then when he incarnates he doesn't mention any of this stuff? Also Adam and Eve were happy, they ate the fruit and everything turned worse. None of this adds up.
Well... if you want to be Gnostic you'd have to follow the Nag Hammadi Library
http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhlcodex.html
The Nag Hammadi Library is a bit like the Dead Sea Scrolls, in that provides different narratives and contexts then the Bible as we know it
Which is true? Who knows
The Gnostic gospels all come from the Nag Hammadi Library and it's claimed in them that Jesus teaches some (or perhaps all) of this Gnostic stuff
tnx on info.
When i was reading Alexandria Quartet, there was quite a word salad referenced to kabbalah, hermetism, coptic church, etc, mostly because of "whole alexandrian misticism" scene.
I tried to do some reading but eventually discarded it all off as a BS.
Without this low-down i would off forget all them larpers from Alexandria Quartet.
read Against Heresies by st Irenaeus, he completely debunks all the gnostics. That picture is 100% a fanfiction and is about as based in reality as manicheism or marcionism
Marcion somewhat made sense as israelites being similar to women in temperament a la Weininger "mother earth, father sky"
brainlets still don't understand that eve is the christian version of sophia
christ was NOT the snake on the tree, christ is the guy on the cross no matter what, coming to this world to give us an instruction manual to get out if we so choose, this can not happen without the fall occurring first, the fall is not the spark
Gnostic isn't a sect like Lutheran or Mormon. It's an umbrella term for bunch of sects in the early church. Saying one thing is true for all Gnostics is like saying Anglican beliefs hold for Pentecostals.
Some Gnostic texts do indeed have Christ in the role of the snake. People like to focus on the most wild Gnostic stories, mostly those from The Apocryphon of John and The Hypostasis of the Archons (the evil Yaldaboath in the Garden, the gang rape of Eve by Yaldaboath and his Archons, etc.). But many Gnostics didn't hold to this.
John is arguably a Gnostic book and it is Canon. Orgien and other Patristics who had a huge influence on the mainline church were Gnostics. A Gnostic was almost Pope. Gnosticism was often not its own sect, but a special study group within existing churches for people who wanted to go deeper.
You can either define Gnostic narrowly as any Christian or israeli sect with a demiurge narrative, or more broadly as those which had Christ as bestowing humanity with a path to enlightenment and special inner knowledge of God. Christian reincarnation theology normally gets pooled in with the term Gnostic.
A lot of material on the Gnostics is shit because until recently we only had.
A. Heretic hunters descriptions of Gnostic teachings, which we now know are bad straw men.
B. Bits and pieces that survived, often blended with esoteric traditions making it harder to tell what historically went with what.
Kenoma is absolutely, 100%, insanely batshit furious about having stuff in it, because the presence of that stuff inflicted on it the ability to comprehend that it contains stuff, and it's incredibly pissed about having contents, properties, and indeed any sort of awareness. This is a situation that I feel most Gnostic discussion neglects.
Take
for reference. There are things in the shape of Man devoid of any shred of divinity, even further "below" hylics. They are matter which emulates Man, the ultimate product of the Demiurge's hubris, and his eventual downfall. They are the most absolute form of sociopathy. Through their empty eyes, the knowledge of Being (both Pleroma and the false world) shone into the void and forced it to take shape around this knowledge. One of these empty vessels, piloted by the will of Nothing, is eventually going to violently dismember the Demiurge and throw the bloody scraps back into Pleroma, then wag its finger at Existence for failing to contain itself.
Even the Kenoma rejects the Demiurge. You almost gotta feel sorry for the poor guy.
why is the demiurge bad? he's just playing around on his own with the refuse from the pleroma
He's a good boy
i´ll frick him in the ass
This entity is nothing more than a projection you conjure up to scapegoat all your problems to.
But how do I know you're not just projecting when you say that?
Frick Feuerbach, He is a hylic
>he doesn't know
Anon, I...
boomer drivel
The demiurge is a human invention.
Nietzsche is as confused as the Demiurge itself, and just an insecure
These tales are meant to awaken new thoughts
The Demiurge of course is a good person, as almost all entities strive to be
>a good person
Not him but you're either a person or you're not, right? So what's a "good" person?
A person is any entity
A good person is any entity that intends to do good
Define entity.
Entity is anything that experiences "cogito ergo sum"
Things don't "experience" anything.
I think we maybe divided on the definitions of words here
If you agree "cogito ergo sum" exists in any sense, then whatever it exists in is what im talking about
If you don't believe in "cogito ergo sum" then we are divided on that definition
If you don't believe in it, I would love to hear why you don't
"cogito ergo sum" only applies to people.
Okay then that is what I'm talking about and we can agree on that
my personhood, my ego is so much more than just my cognition
That is true, I'm just referring to the most easily determinable tell tale sign
The heart beat, if you will
The only thought this awakened in me is how delusional people can get
>The only thought this awakened in me is how delusional people can get
This is very true, but it must be said this includes you
>no u
Ngmi anon
You mistake what I'm saying, I'm deflecting, I too am deluded just as you are
Man was never destined to place his finite will above God's infinite one.
Nietzsche is as confused as the Demiurge itself, and just as insecure
These tales are meant to awaken new thoughts
The Demiurge of course is a good person, as almost all entities strive to be
>Gnosticism is not life affirming.
Neither is shitting years of your life away on IQfy you pathetic larping pseud.
>anyone I disagree with is a "le pathetic larping pseud"
>anyone I disagree with
No just the self-awareness avoidant gays who wax verbose about affirming life as they piss away yet another day on IQfy (like the rest of us). Cope, pseud.
The demiurge is a human invention.
WE ARE THE DEMIURGE
>:)
Humanity is a demiurgic invention.
You're tripping.
That would be you.
t. cannot see forest from trees
Back to /x/. You know you want to.
Le demiurge isn't real, gnosticism is a freemason cope.
The demiurge is not real. You are not being oppressed by an all-power demon god. Take your meds.
>The demiurge is not real. You are not being oppressed by an all-power demon god. Take your meds.
>You are not being oppressed by an all-power demon god.
Oh yes I am sweaty
I like these things as exercises, like thought experiments. I don't like when people act as if any of this can be pinned down this definitely. The classic ideas about God etc aren't as arbitrary. We can argue logically about the world up to a point but you can't make many convincing arguments about the stuff that came before everything you use to argue existed.
nietzsches whole philosophy was BTFO'd by Wagner's life
His problem was having no problems.
He wrote the universe in Java instead of Haskell.
Feels more like Malbolge
>Seinfeld Screenplay.
>Season 40 episode 21
>The Demiurge Tortures George But Jerry Sees The Bright Side.
>----------------------------
INT. GEORGE'S OFFICE - DAY
George is sitting at his desk, looking miserable. The door opens and Jerry walks in.
Jerry: Hey, George. What's the matter?
George: I'm in hell, Jerry. The demiurge is torturing me.
Jerry: Oh, that sounds terrible. What's the demiurge?
George: It's the evil being who created the universe and controls everything in it.
Jerry: Wow. That sounds really bad.
George: Yeah. It's awful. I'm being tortured by this thing and there's no escape.
Jerry: Well, it's not all bad. At least you're not being tortured by a boring, mundane thing like a paperclip or a pencil sharpener.
George: That's true. I guess it could be worse.
Jerry: Yeah. You could be being tortured by a really boring, mundane thing like a paperclip or a pencil sharpener.
George: Yeah. I guess you're right. Thanks, Jerry.
Jerry: No problem, George.
>In the latest episode of Seinfeld, George is granted the powers of the Demiurge. He tries to make the world a better place, but hilariously, everything he does causes more suffering.
>[INT. JERRY'S APARTMENT]
>GEORGE: I'm gonna get rid of death, Jerry! No one dies anymore!
[KRAMER AND JERRY LOOK AT EACH OTHER IN CONFUSION]
Jerry: What do you mean, no one dies anymore?
George: No one dies. No more death.
Jerry: What about car accidents?
George: They still happen, but everyone lives.
Jerry: So people are just getting mangled for no reason now?
George: No, no, no. The hospitals will be able to fix them.
Jerry: So everyone's just going to the hospital all the time?
George: Yes! And it'll be free!
Jerry: So the hospitals are always full and there's never a bed available?
George:No, the hospitals will be bigger.
Jerry: So the government is just going to keep building hospitals until there's one on every block?
George: Well, maybe not every block. But definitely a lot more than there are now.
Jerry: And what about old age? People are just going to live forever?
George: Yes!
Jerry: So the population is just going to keep growing and growing until the whole world is one big city?
George: Well, maybe not the whole world. But definitely a lot of it.
Jerry: And what are people going to do for work?
George: I don't know. Maybe they'll all be doctors.
Jerry: So everyone's a doctor?
George: Well, maybe not everyone. But definitely a lot of people.
Jerry: And what about food? Everyone's just going to eat at the hospital?
George: No, no, no. There will be restaurants.
Jerry: So the restaurants are always full and there's never a table available?
tfw these AI texts are all LITERALLY the Demiurge speaking to us right now
>Transcript of a hilarious standup performance by the Demiurge at the Comedy Place.
Hey everybody!
I'm the Demiurge, and I'm here to talk about all the things that make you go "hmmm."
Like, why do we have to put up with all this crap? I mean, seriously, why can't we just have a world where everything is awesome all the time?
Is it because we're not worthy? Or is it because someone up there doesn't want us to be happy?
I'm leaning towards the latter.
Seriously, though, what is the deal? I mean, life is hard enough as it is, without all the BS.
I'm not saying that everything should be handed to us on a silver platter, but come on!
We work hard, we play by the rules, and what do we get in return?
A big fat nothing!
I'm sick and tired of it, and I know I'm not the only one.
So let's all band together and demand a better world!
One where we don't have to put up with this crap anymore!
Thank you, and goodnight!
>booo! frick you demiurge you suck!
Somehow I don't think it's a coincidence that the dead sea scrolls and the nag hammadi texts were discovered so close together immediately after the war.
>thinks that gnosticism just means spending years in contemplation and letting your body wither until death takes you and hopefully leads you to pleroma
Every human being not going to the extreme limits is the servant or the enemy of man and an accomplice of nameless obscenity.
I train both mind and body so I can beat up the false god in every way.
If the Demiurge is responsible for the flawed material world, and the Monad's emanations eventually begat the Demiurge, then the Monad is ultimately responsible for the flawed material world.
Emanation isn’t a thing that the Monad has to “do”; it just happens as a consequence of the Monad being so ineffable and infinite that it’s thought literally overflows beyond infinity itself and produces the emanations automatically
God isn’t personified in Gnosticism as hard as He is in standard Christianity, He isn’t like an architect that goes about putting cosmos together because He has literally no reason to when He’s already perfect - the lowest emanation, Sophia, is responsible for the Demiurge, but unlike the God of Nicene Christianity she doesn’t try to shirk responsibility for it and repents of her mistake
But that doesn't solve anything. The Monad, by its very nature, produces a chain of emanations whose end is a flawed material world. You can ascribe ineffability and perfect beauty and infinity to it all you want but it doesn't change that fact. The Christian God deliberately created the world and may have had a purpose for allowing it to exist in its fallen state, but the Monad can't help itself from breathing into existence the pleroma and all that followed. It's just as responsible, maybe even more so since it creates ultimately flawed things by nature rather than by choice.
You're thinking about it all wrong. The Monad is infinite, all possibility. There is no evil in it because all things are balanced by their opposite. Fear exists inside the Monad but it balanced by calm, heat by cold, etc., all elements of experience.
The Pleroma is still perfect because the Aeons are all in a harmonious balance (Heraclitus' ontology of the tension of opposites is partly an inspiration).
Our world is flawed because it isn't in balance.
The Monad is the cause of all that is, but talking about It being somehow personally responsible for the material world is like saying a vial of hydrogen gas is guilty of sloth, it makes no sense. There is no personified context for ethics to apply in.
How the Monad emanates through the Barbelõ is mysterious. Based on the ogdoad's legacy in esoterica, it's possible to see emanations occurring for the same reason Boheme has God creating: contradiction.
Having just one thing, the Monad, is contradictory. There is nothing to define the Monad, it has no meaning. It's like the information content of an infinite string of 1s. Meaning requires difference.
Non-contradiction requires emanation.
I haven't read enough on this tension of opposites stuff to properly respond to your post at this time, but thanks for offering something of substance to think about in response to my objections. I've brought this issue up in gnostic threads for months and never received a serious answer.
I'll see you in a future thread.
But this is all just Valentinus, though. None of these arguments apply to Mani, to Marcion, to the Sethians, to Basilides in his early phase, not even to more contemporary systems like Rosario's or even Lindsay.
>The Monad, by its very nature, produces a chain of emanations whose end is a flawed material world.
Plotinus has some good arguments about this sort of thing. Its perfect nature makes it all giving, and its better for there to be a chain of flawed imitations of the monad then nothing else at all. Perfection still gets to shine through deeper layers.
>the Monad's emanations eventually begat the Demiurge
Only in Valentinian models.
Why does everything have to be life affirming?
>because it just does, dammit, ok?!
Schopenhauer wins again
Now I see why left wants to mix Marx with Nietzsche. It all makes sense now. The ultimate demiurge
I've updated the Gnostic chart. This is a chart for temperamental, as opposed to scholarly, Gnosticism, so some of the selections are bound to be idiosyncratic, though I've tried to balance them with the more traditional scholarly stuff. Eckhart is on the list because he is a thinker of radical immanence.
I consider Walker somewhat compromised (he's an emanationist), but his book is still compelling. Enjoy.
>Eckhart
>radical immanence
Relevant paper on this specific subject: https://www.nature.com/articles/palcomms201527
Yeah, I was probably the one who recommended that paper to you. It's great.
Lately I've been waking up in the middle of the night with a feeling of claustrophobic despair and fear, at times even asking myself if I was about to go into some kind of psychotic break. After hours of waiting it out I eventually become exhausted and fall asleep, and it's gone by the time I wake up. I've never had that before, I've had difficult nights but nothing that intense, and never this regularly. I'm starting to think psychic parasitism is real in a worryingly literal sense.
You should see a good psychologist or a good doctor
So I can get prescribed benzos?
... I don't know if I'd recommend benzos, that sounds pretty dangerous
I said psychologist too, maybe you can talk things out with a good one
It does, I don't want to numb myself with pills.
>psychologist
I don't think getting too deep into this shit with someone who decides whether or not I can be considered sane is a good idea.
A therapist or a psychologist cant have you committed unless you intend to kill someone or become violent or dangerous
Plus you have patient confidentiality
>A therapist or a psychologist cant have you committed unless you intend to kill someone or become violent or dangerous
or suicide ideation. also dangerous is completely subjective.
im not the guy but im tired of people who dont see the deeply wrong thing that is a carachter in society who decide who is mentally sane and who is not based in whatever mental theory.
You'd have to give an example of someone unreasonably being committed recently
Your line of reasoning so far doesn't make sense without a real example
Because I haven't heard of any of this, you cannot be forcefully committed over just simple suicidal ideation these days
iirc only psychiatrists are handled by my health plan and I can't afford paying out of my own pocket for now.
I feel suffocated by a deep anxiety whose origin I can't pinpoint. I become paranoid that I'm going to lose myself, not exactly lose control over my actions because it doesn't feel like dysphoric mania, but I feel like something inside my mind is disconnecting and that I'm in danger of losing touch with reality and with others. I feel a tension, a ball of stress and the prospect of it just blowing up at some point and driving me into some kind of breakdown reinforces the fear.
It's difficult to describe.
>iirc only psychiatrists are handled by my health plan and I can't afford paying out of my own pocket for now.
Psychiatrists are the most expensive, if they are covered then so should anything below
But if that is the case, then just move to California wear everything is free
I'm not american and no, only psychiatrists are covered because only they are medical doctors
Well thats a shame, maybe find a good psychiatrist that is willing to only talk, I have personally experienced those
Describe this feeling in more detail.
Also, it just feels like things are not the same as they used to be. That I'm not the same. Like something inside me might have changed for the worst, that my view of reality has shifted without my knowing, and the idea fills me with dread
https://aeon.co/essays/how-emdr-helps-to-reprocess-traumatic-memories-at-warp-speed
https://bigthink.com/neuropsych/the-sanskrit-effect-reciting-mantras-shown-to-improve-cognitive-function/
https://mindworks.org/blog/how-meditation-improves-physical-health/
https://www.verywellfit.com/the-mental-benefits-of-jogging-2911666
Does this help if I have no identifiable trauma?
Regarding the last one, I exercise every other day.