Re: BORIS MOURAVIEFF: Gnosis
luke wilson said:
I dont know where else to post this so I am going to post here...
I have just read the Gnosis series and I have some questions that I hope somebody may shed some light on..
In Gnosis, Mouravieff talks about developing the personality... What does that mean exactly?? As far as I understand it, it means, to try and not be mechanical, to learn how to handle negative emotions, to understand the reasons why one is doing something and to not lie to oneself... Am I anywhere near the right track here??
Per my understanding, Mouravieff means balancing the 3 lower centers which would then enable communication with the higher emotional and higher intellectual centers. In practical terms, it does involve what you have written.
[quote author=luke wilson]
He also uses alot of Biblical quotes and extracts quite profound meaning from them... My question is, if the Bible is a huuuge propaganda and all this, how can there exist these sayings that have such meaning when interpretted esoterically like the way he does in the book? I mean, they, the control system replaced the 'real' jesus with this 'fake' jesus of the Bible and still did not manage to get rid of the esoteric value of messages and sayings... To what end?
[/quote]
There is some biblical "gloss" in Gnosis - which I think was mentioned by the C's - yet it is also said to contain very important information. In general, esoteric texts need to be contemplated (and where applicable experienced in real life situation) to discern the meaning. Reading any real esoteric text with only mechanical perception and reasoning can lead to misunderstanding - and in that respect, the Bible (and other religious texts) which have been post-processed and diluted, have served the purpose of the control system. Sleeping masses cannot discern the truth from the text - yet those who are active and genuine seekers do have clues to work on piecing together the whole puzzle. In India, there is a metaphorical saying used in the context of seekers looking for spiritual knowledge - royal swans when given diluted milk can filter out the milk and drink it leaving out the water. (On a lighter note, such swans seem unaware of the evils of dairy though).
[quote author=luke wilson]
Lastly, I have a question that has been on my mind ever since discovering that there were people like Mouravieff and Guerdjieff who knew so much stuff that had so much meaning. Not meaning interms of 'dead knowledge' like what modern science is, knowledge that doesnt change ones being because it excludes the emotional centre, but they had 'knowledge that was alive' that acted on a person and as far as I understand from reading Gnosis, the aim is to conquer/overcome death at the second birth. Now, as far as I know, they died meaning despite the knowledge, they didnt achieve the aim of Gnosis. What went wrong? They lived and breathed this stuff yet 'died.' What chance do the rest of us have?? I took 'death' literally as in to die, to cease to live.
[/quote]
I do not know which stage G and M reached in their individual Work. If I remember correctly, The C's mentioned somewhere that M was a keeper of an ancient tradition and not a master of it. Anyway, per my understanding, transcending physical death (ie death of the physical body) is not the primary aim of Gnosis. G talks about immortality in ISOTM.
[quote author=ISOTM]
"You ask whether man is immortal or not.
"I shall answer. Both yes and no.
"This question has many different sides to it. First of all what does immortal mean? Are you speaking of absolute immortality or do you admit different degrees? If for instance after the death of the body something remains which lives for some time preserving its consciousness, can this be called immortality or not? Or let us put it this way: how long a period of such existence is necessary for it to be called immortality? Then does this question include the possibility of a different 'immortality' for different people? And there are still many other different questions. I am saying this only in order to show how vague they are and how easily such words as 'immortality' can lead to illusion. In actual fact nothing is immortal, even God is mortal. But there is a great difference between man and God, and, of course. God is mortal in a different way to man. It would be much better if for the word 'immortality' we substitute the words 'existence after death.' Then I will answer that
man has the possibility of existence after death.
[/quote]
G mentions the 4 bodies (physical, astral, causal and mental) and says that immortality is the property of a Man (number 7) who has all 4 bodies. But a man who has developed an astral body in his lifetime can live for a period of time after the death of the physical body. In general, G says that
[quote author=ISOTM]
"In man of two, three, and four bodies, the most active body also lives the longest, that is, it is 'immortal' in relation to a lower body."
..................
The physical body dies and nothing is left of it. The physical body is composed of earthly material and at death it returns to earth. It is dust and to dust it returns.
[/quote]
The last part about the physical body is mentioned in the context of a man who has only one body but it could perhaps be true in the context of a man who has multiple bodies as well - osit. If that is indeed the case, then just the physical death of any person would not give an indication as to the level reached during life.
[quote author=luke wilson]
They lived and breathed this stuff yet 'died.' What chance do the rest of us have??
[/quote]
For one thing, we have a network. But keeping expectation of any desired outcome aside, just walking this path seems worthwhile. Even the longest journey starts with the first step. Different people are on different points of the learning cycle - and if we do not artificially restrict the possibilities, there is a chance for us - or so I like to think.