St. Sarah the Egyptian Gnostic Community

I was shocked, once I started paying attention, how much people used the term “they” in daily speech. Not that you can hold a conversation without using the word, it’s the way that it’s used that gets me.

If we all contain the same divine spark, or if we are all facets of the divine, then the word “they” is the most dangerous word in english. “They” promotes a world view that says “This is me, everything else is not me.” Whereas a world view that uses “we” or, even better, “I” more often in daily speech would be much closer to the truth.

I’ve just finished a book that I enjoyed very much called “The Mystic Christ“. It was not overtly Gnostic, even though it quoted extensively from the Gospel of Thomas, but it’s message, when viewed with Gnosis in mind, was very clear. We are all one, and therefore, what we do unto others we do unto ourselves, and by extention, unto God. I recommend it.

It’s praxis is simple. So simple, in fact, that about halfway through the book I started to say “I get it, let’s hear something new.” But it was good stuff. The author proposes that if we were to simply love eveybody like we loved ourselves then we would find Gnosis. How could you disagree with that? Jesus said it in the Bible, he said it in the Gnostic scriptures, When you make the two into one, protect your neighbor like the pupil of your eye, pray for your enemies… It’s all there. The author refers to this indwelling unity as the “I AM THAT I AM” or the I AM, for short. I will start using this term. It represents the “self” or the “I” that we all share in common, but is not limited to just your physical incarnation.

So what I intend to do is to use this as my only praxis. I intend to love everybody I see all the time. I’ve already started trying to do this, and let me tell you, it’s not very easy at all. We’ve all been conditioned since birth that I am not you and that I need to get what’s mine before you do. If we start looking at the world as the I AM then things get so much simpler. I can let you have it since I’m going to get it anyway. Not the best example, I know, but I think you get the point.

I will use this blog to record my progress. Stay tuned…

For your consideration,

I was at lunch at a popular local restaurant and reading a book, as I often like to do. There was a party of four women probably in their early 30s at best. For about an hour they sat there talking about men. Gossip, really. Who was dating who, what ever happened to whatsisname, don’t so-and-so and whatserface have kids together… Blech…

What is the point of this? Are these women so shallow and unfulfilled that they have nothing else to talk about? They were so intense about the menial things that they were talking about that I began to feel sorry for them. I wanted so badly for them to have something more substantial in their lives.

I don’t see this as their fault. We have been told for a long time that relationships with others, coupling specifically, is the most important thing in life. Just look at all the dating websites. The Archons want us to loose our heads to these feelings of lust and interdependence.

Here’s the deal, I want to level with you (if there’s anybody listening). I just had a bad weekend. I spent the weekend with an old friend from high school. We didn’t hang out much back that but I had a tremendous crush on her. I see her more often now than I did back then, and these feelings, evidently, haven’t gone away. Needless to say the time I spend with her is just one long stress event, hoping to make sure she knows how I feel without having the balls to actually say anything about it.

Fear is a tremendous motivator. In fact, my theory is that fear is just about the only motivator, and deep down at the root of almost every action is a fear. Our egos are created over time by fear. The fear of abandonment or being alone, fear of rejection, fear of physical pain, fear of not having what (you perceive) you need to survive, and that may be it.

I recently watched Donnie Darko for the first time, and while I don’t really think it is any more gnostic than most other films, I did get a lot out of it. For example, the self-help guru guy who talks about fear and love as opposites. I think he was probably right, and I was surpised to see my theory in the film. Let’s gloss over the fact that he likes ‘em young. He makes an interesting point.

So I’m pretty disappointed with my behavior over the weekend. I let the Archons tug on my strings again. Admitting you have a problem is the first step, so now I just have to work on incorporating this knowledge.

So to the women in the restaurant, take a good look at yourself and ask yourself why you are so obsessed with coupling and I’ll do the same.

Nothing like a good Beatles quote to start a mediocre post!

However, in this case it’s relevant. I’m reading a great book called “The Mystic Christ” by Ethan Walker III, a disciple of Ammachi. “Amma” is an Indian mystic who, from her quotes, is a woman who has experienced gnosis. I haven’t finished the book yet, but I’m enjoying it very much.

Of late I’ve been a little hard on myself for not actually doing anything. I’ve been reading about gnosis, and talking about gnosis, but I haven’t been persuing gnosis. On the forum there have been folks telling each other to get out there and do it. Well I don’t know what it is.

This book is pretty clear about what it is. Love. It’s essentially the Platinum Rule that Jeremy (and others) talks about so often. If it is true that we are all part of God, then we have to love each other as we love ourselves. Protect our neighbor like the pupil of our eye, if you will.

I will post more about this book once I’ve finished it. One thing that I found a little off-putting about it so far is the author does quite a bit of Christian-bashing. He devotes a whole chapter to tearing apart the Bible. Now I don’t put much more stock in the Bible than anything else, but I don’t think it needs to be dismantled. I don’t think I’m the target audience though. I think it was intended for questioning Christians, so that they would fall of the Bible wagon alltogether.

For your consideration,

I really didn’t want to have anything to do with this debate that’s been going on lately between the Thomasine Church and the Ecclesiastical Gnostics. But it’s been a slow news week and nobody reads this anyway.

If you don’t know what I’m talking about then count yourself lucky. “Don’t go looking for trouble” is what my momma used to say, but it seems that Mar Didymos sorta poked the proverbial hornet’s nest with his criticism of Modern Gnostic ritual. Having never been a part of one of the churches he criticizes, I really have no right to stick my nose in anyway, but as you can see, I’m doing just that.

Let me preface this by saying that nothing that I ever say to you will be the truth. I don’t claim to be right ever. There will never be a time when I believe that I am 100% right. I am skeptical of everything everywhere. So take all this with a grain of salt.

What’s so special about the form of ritual anyway? No doubt ritual as a whole can be very beneficial to the translation of all things spiritual into physical human terms so that we can begin to make some sense of them. But that’s all they are, right? I don’t think I know of anybody who is claiming that the ritual is actually the divine. Ritual is simply one tool in a large tool belt of Gnosis. Speaking as one who has used his share of tools, I can say that lots of things can be used as a hammer, with varying degrees of success. Sure, a hammer is probably the best tool to push a nail into some wood, but there are almost as many hammer designs as there are species of insects, it seems to me. All of those hammers will get that nail into the wood, and some may take longer or take more strokes, but at the end of the day that nail is deep in the wood where you want it. Who cares what hammer did the job, the job is done.

So Mar Didymos, quit telling people that their hammers won’t work. Even if you do have the biggest hammer (May God bless his shiny balls), these people like the hammer they’re using. At the end of the day, when all of our nails are safely home and the work is done, let’s all go get a cold one at the bar down the street.

I think this is the biggest reason why I like the AGCA. Nobody is an expert. Nobody wants to tell you that such-and-such a ritual will get you gnosis, or this-and-that praxis will lead to enlightenment. It’s not the path you take, it’s the place you’re going.

However, as a community there is a need for some social conformity. There are certain forms that a group of people need to agree upon in order to remain a group of people. Ritual and praxis serve those purposes. The thing the AGCA (and it’s founder, who is pretty smart about such things) realizes is that ritual and praxis are never as important as gnosis, and no matter how well your ritual works for you, it may be totally wrong for me. Your hammer may be too long for my swing, but we’ll both hit that nail.

I’ve been trying to come up with a good analogy for the type of group that the AGCA is, but I’m having trouble doing that. It’s not really a church, not structured enough. It’s not really a tradition, too flexible. It’s not really a school, It doesn’t teach much on its own. It’s kinda like one of those civic clubs, like the Rotary Club or the Exchange Club. Lots of people from different backgrounds come together to network and share information. It’s a little like the Palm Tree Garden, but the only real difference is that we in the AGCA choose to identify with eachother, where the PTG encourages the individuality of its members. I’m not saying that one is better. I find great value in both, and I need to thank both Brother Matthew and Jeremy Puma (May God also bless their shiny balls) for their vision. They have both created places that have allowed me to explore the gnosis and get to know some really interesting and smart people who I never would have known otherwise.

Now that all the ball washing (and ball blessing) is complete, I need more coffee.

For your consideration,

In a previous post I previewed the expereince filter, and I wanted to go into some more detail about it.

Let’s assume for a minute that when we are born we are able to experience all of reality all of the time. We can see, hear, smell touch, taste reality as it really is. We can see the Black Iron Prison, the archons, the tricks of the archons, and the people still under thier control. This would imply that at birth there is no need to search for gnosis, you would just exist in a state of gnosis all the time. You would be the Valentinian pneumatic human. More on that later.

In order to survive physically in a world controled largely by archons, your parents and society would teach you how to survive, interact with other humans, things like that. You would have to push certain things out of your concept of reality to accomidate these new things you were being taught. You would enter a state of (voluntary?) amnesia.

As a child you are completely under the rule of your parents. You are a hylic human. You are ruled by the law set forth by your parents and your society.

As you grow older, you may never move past this state. However, if you do, you become moral. You believe that ethics trump the law. You may become an activist, to try to change the system, to save those less fortunate. You are the psychic human.

Then, of course, through the gnosis experience, you can become the pneumatic human.

So the process that you would use to experience the gnosis is a process of destruction. Anamnesis. Let’s look at it in a different way.

In the begining there was the fullness, without time or space. I became aware of myself, and I began to create form for myself. As I created form I forgot the fullness, and began to learn about form. I created other forms to accomidate my form, and I created the world in my own image. The more that I created, the further my mind was from the fullness. In order to return to the grace of the fullness, I first need to remember it, and then I need to tear down my creations, since they are false.

For your consideration,