I wish to revolt against the logical strictures of the Demiurge and achieve the fullness of the Pleroma. What is the best literature for leading me down the Gnostic path? I know there are the Gnostic gospels, are there any in particular that are especially good as a starting point? Is there any literature that could guide me through the initiatory aspect of Gnostic practice as would have occurred when it was a living tradition? I don't want to just learn about Gnosticism, I want to actually achieve Gnosis. What books can lead me best down the path of learning and living how the truth above reality truly is?

>>24544086 (OP)
>salvation is through being intelligent enough to see through a veil that has been placed over reality itself by an evil version of god who watches your every move and is constantly trying to stop you
How arrogant do you need to be to think gnosis is achieveable, and by what metric does anyone legitimise their claim to having achieved it? Gnosticism is a complete nothingburger. It's Christianity without God, Heaven or a reason to be care about righteousness.

>>24544843
No dummy
It's salvation through knowledge
Knowledge=Sophia but knowledge=/=knowing everything but knowledge of God

Maybe u don't have a spark

please read some legitimate platonic or hermetic philosophy instead of glorifying some obscurantist cults that got obliterated by being clowned on so hard by actual intellectuals.

Studying the tatters of Sethian and Valentinian Gnosticism is potentially dangerous because you will sclerotize them as doctrines and myths instead of understanding their exoteric/esoteric function. I would recommend studying other nondual traditions first, ones where remnants of texts explaining (or at least anagogically indicating) the esoteric content still exist. Nothing like that really exists for Orphism (unless you count Plato) or Gnosticism, but for example in Islam you can still read something like Hayy ibn Yaqzan (and you should, it's like 60 pages of actual text in the University of Chicago edition) and for Platonism you can still read many authors from Plutarch to Proclus and even Julian.

Doing this has its own risks, as authentic esoteric traditions have a tendency to lapse into mere dogmatism and scholasticism, and waste generations or centuries formalizing details of the doctrines and myths instead of using them as a ladder that gets kicked away in the end. But at least you will get closer to the source.

Unironically sometimes it's better to read something totally decontextualized that still triggers pre-mystic "thaumazein," like certain gnomic passages of the Gospels even, than it is to read endlessly formalized and scholasticized doctrines technically produced by once-vital nondual traditions. But even worse would be memorizing exoteric myths for the sake of memorizing them. Obviously these myths are delightful and worth learning, but the point of them for the people who recorded them was to be the finger that points at the moon. You're not supposed to memorize every contour of the finger, you're supposed to look at the moon.

>>24544851
Why would an all knowing unloving god care about knowledge? There is no such thing as a lower creature reaching "enlightenment".

>>24544928
>Kicks his creations out of the garden for gaining knowledge
>Why would this thing care about knowledge

belief in Gnosticism just screams midwit that doesn't know anything about epistemology.

>>24544086 (OP)
Dear friend, I strongly suggest you read Peter Sloterdijk’s After God. It offers very clean and concise conceptualizations of Gnosticism. A fascinating book in its own right, and does a great job to explain common pitfalls many are still confused about. Like, it clearly distinguishes between the whole “bawww le worde le ebil” loosh-matrix extraction narrative and the true white-pill generosity pneuma (spirit) mindset. Here’s the piece, pic related. (You reminded me to reread it myself. I remember it was illuminating, and such books deserve to be meditated upon many times.)

Parallel to that, go up the Gospel of Thomas lane.
>"Let him who see[ks] cease not [to seek until he] finds: when he finds, [he will wonder; and when he wond]ers, he will reign, and [reigning, he will have r]est!"

And don't forget that even posting can be instrumentalized for the sake of your spiritual progress. Being honest and willing to learn and to share 'links' (Zelda) one to the bright numen (the Legend). wagmi.

>>24544086 (OP)
Dear friend, I strongly suggest you read Peter Sloterdijk’s After God. It offers very clean and concise conceptualizations of Gnosticism. A fascinating book in its own right, it does a great job to explain common pitfalls many are still confused about. Like, it clearly distinguishes between the whole “bawww le worde le ebil” loosh-matrix extraction narrative (a stage, yes. but some foolishly insist on it) and the true white-pill generosity pneuma (spirit) mindset. Here’s the piece, pic related. (You reminded me to reread it myself. I remember it was illuminating, and such books deserve to be meditated upon many times.)

Parallel to that, go up the Gospel of Thomas lane.
>"Let him who see[ks] cease not [to seek until he] finds: when he finds, [he will wonder; and when he wond]ers, he will reign, and [reigning, he will have r]est!"

And don't forget that even posting can be instrumentalized for the sake of your spiritual progress. Being honest and willing to learn and to share 'links' (Zelda) one to the bright numen (the Legend). wagmi.

>blocks your path

the apple of eden was a big red pill, if you reflect on it

>>24544857
>some obscurantist cults that got obliterated by being clowned on so hard by actual intellectuals.
Are you retarded? The gnostics weren't destroyed by facts and logic, they got destroyed by swords and spears, from people who clearly couldn't debate them and that, in fact, proved them right with their savagery and arrogance

>>24546988
>gains insight from the heresies you preserved by writing polemics against them
nothing personnel, kid...

>>24544086 (OP)
Be Good

>>24544086 (OP)

>>24546988
>be me
>gain insight from heresies you immortalized by seething against them
nothing personnel, kid...

>>24545873
Good post. There is something very effete about 'gnostic' miserabilism. Meme gnosticism's fascination with the Archons and Demiurge to the exclusion of the Aeons is the same. The joyous dimension of Gnosticism also precludes the totalitarian impulse which Voegelin erroneously attributed to the tradition. I may have been the person who recommended After God to you.

>>24545856
'Know thyself' transcends epistemology. You are your own standard of verification, because gnosis is knowledge of your extraworldly nature.

Now that Laruelle's dead, Sloterdijk remains the only real contemporary Gnostic, though of a more ascetological bent. But Laruelle remains the granddaddy. More than de-psychologizing Gnosticism, his singular contribution to Gnostic studies is immanentizing gnosis more radically than even Voegelin attempted to do, without violating its spirit.

>The truth of ourselves is never ours, whereas what is ours (the Real, the lived) is always indifferent to any truth.

This is the first principle of acosmism.

>>24544086 (OP)

>>24544086 (OP)
>I want to actually achieve Gnosis.
Gnosis (from the Greek word "gnōsis" meaning "knowledge" or "awareness") is a profound and direct, often intuitive, understanding of spiritual truths, particularly concerning one's true nature and connection to the divine. It's often contrasted with intellectual or analytical knowledge, and in many traditions, it's considered a path to liberation or salvation.

Achieving Gnosis is a deeply personal and experiential journey, and there isn't a single, universally prescribed method. Different traditions and approaches offer various practices. Here's a breakdown of common themes and practices associated with seeking Gnosis:

Core Concepts in Gnosis:

Inner Knowledge: Gnosis is primarily an inner "knowing" rather than a belief system or adherence to dogma. It's about direct experience and revelation.

Self-Discovery: A key aspect is understanding one's true self, often seen as a divine spark or essence, distinct from the material world and ego.

Transcendence of the Material: Many Gnostic traditions view the material world as flawed or a realm of illusion, and Gnosis is the means to transcend its limitations.

Divine Connection: Gnosis aims to reconnect the individual with a higher, true God or source, often seen as distinct from the "demiurge" (a flawed creator god) in some Gnostic cosmologies.

Liberation/Salvation: For many Gnostics, Gnosis is not just a means to salvation, but salvation itself – a liberation from suffering and the limitations of earthly existence.

Practices Associated with Achieving Gnosis:

While diverse, many paths to Gnosis involve some combination of the following:

Introspection and Self-Observation: Deep self-inquiry to understand your own thoughts, emotions, motivations, and the nature of your consciousness. This is fundamental to recognizing the "divine spark" within.

Meditation and Contemplation:

Inhibitory Gnosis (Chaos Magic): This involves deep meditation to reach a trance state, often using slow breathing, thought suppression, progressive muscle relaxation, and self-hypnosis. Practices like fasting, sleeplessness, and sensory deprivation can also be employed to quiet the mind.

One-Pointedness/No-Mind: Focusing the mind on a single point or goal, pushing out all other thoughts, similar to Zen meditation. This helps bypass the conscious mind's "filters."

Theoria (Eastern Orthodoxy): In Eastern Orthodox Christianity, Gnosis is linked to theoria, a contemplative vision of God, often achieved through practices like Hesychasm (a quietistic prayer tradition).

Study of Sacred Texts and Esoteric Wisdom:

Gnostic Scriptures: Engaging with texts like those found in the Nag Hammadi library (e.g., the Gospel of Thomas, the Secret Book of John) can provide insights and frameworks for understanding Gnostic cosmology and teachings.

Mystical Traditions: Exploring other mystical texts and traditions, such as Hermeticism, Kabbalah,

>>24544857
wrong

>>24544086 (OP)
The best gnostics can offer is comics made in paint.

>>24550477
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15256a.htm

What if seffer yetsahir + platonism

>>24544857
You know that the ancient orthodox christians enjoyed killing pagans as much as they did the gnostics, right? You don't need to suck their dicks

>>24550117
please spare this board from any more of your chatgpt slop posts, retarded jeet

>>24550546
@grok is this true?

>>24544857
I have NEVER EVER heard an actual refutation of Gnosticism of any substance. It's ALWAYS along the lines of
>b-but it's heresy!
>S-some guy just le made it up!
>It was a cult!
I have actively TRIED to not believe in Gnosticism once I learned about it, but I CAN'T. I literally CAN'T NOT believe in this because it explains everything about existence perfectly. And again, I have NEVER NOT ONCE NOT ONE TIME come across an actual refutation of substance that wasn't just demonic screeching that the game got found out.

>>24550617
Why can't barbelos just btfo yaldeboath? Why do we actually need to achieve gnosis to weaken the archons when they're already the weakest powers

>>24550617
Gnostic texts represent various aspects of the universe. The point is not to believe that the stories are true, but rather to go beyond such forms. Human language cannot adequately convey the authentic nature of things. The knowledge conveyed in them is not greater than that in other religions e.g. Eastern Orthodox. If they seem especially true to you that is just a reflection of your temperament, and you would do well to try and make sense of other religions all the more.

>>24544086 (OP)
>I want to actually achieve Gnosis
Yea just go learn about Buddhism, a better tool to accomplish your goal. It hasn't been abandoned like Gnosticism, so there are more living masters to learn from if you need one and the literature is much less schizo.

You choosing Gnosticism over Buddhism would be like choosing a vintage car you think looks cool instead of a modern efficient economy car to get to a far away destination, a destination that you don't even really know yet. They both could work, and still depend on your ability to drive, but which do you think is the better choice to achieve your goal? To be clear, Buddhism isn't the only choice here, just one I am familiar with.

Remember the tools are not the truth, just methodologies of discovering it for yourself.

Gnostics kinda got some of the truth but all fucked up and distorted. The mythopoeia of the Old Testament and the Word/Image concepts went straight over their heads.

>>24544086 (OP)

>>24544086 (OP)

>>24551296

>>24544086 (OP)

>>24544086 (OP)