Gnosis and Eleusis

AGLAIA

That was all very mean spirited.

Let’s talk about Aglaia.

“AGLA is a notarikon (Hebrew-to-Greek gematria) for the word Malkuth. It is a Greek word (aglaia) that means splendor, lordship. As in lordship over Malkuth the Kingdom or mortal realm in Kabbalah, which to draw on my application of the Gnostic metaphysics of transcendental apotheosis and excessus, is both the sephira separated from God and the only member of the sephiroth that generates its own Zohar. However it gets deeper: Plotinus equates Aglaia with the pure radiance (what Gnostics call ennoea, and Kabbalah calls zohar) of the Primary-Intellect of the Neoplatonist tradition, and by extension the EIDEIA to which man must rise in the discovery of both his own nature and the structure of the cosmos: aglaia is the pure radiances or light, the pure ennoea, and thus TRUTH itself. It is not the truth of any one statement or idea or anything: it is the truth of mind reflecting on mind, of that pleroma or plenitude which the servants of JEU call the Treasury of Lights. Aglaia is even the dying word of Herakles as, in his final breath, reason returns to him and he sees what he has done, and by realizing it, relieves himself the burden of conscience through acceptance of an ultimate truth. What is this ultimate truth that eased the heart of the mad Demigod? It is the truth that the multiplicity cannot contain the splendor or aglaia of the One, the burning infentesimal of the original intelligence. That is the tragedy of which Holderlin, in his essay on Empedocles, based the pathos of the philosopher-- as the One reaching out toward the pothos of matter and multiplicity, to re-emerge in aglaia and repeat the process; one–multiplicity–one–multiplicity. AGLA is also used by the Pythagoreans to mark the Tetractys- the mathematical representation of this ultimate cosmic pattern.” - Parodites

Prometh, you just attempted to argue with a myth that gnostics tell. You understand that a myth is just a kind of extended metaphor to make things more approachable for initiates? Afterlife? Who believes in an afterlife? The afterlife is now buddy, as is the beforelife and the sidewayslife and the obverselife and inverselife and all different kinds of life. To be clear though, the Gods and mythic beings are real. It is just that the Self- the Gnostic Sigil cleaved in Aglaia from the Godhead, the enlightened Self- is more real than the Gods. So a master is free to use them as tools to whatever end they require.

Prometh, you didn’t cut through anything, save that by asserting the reproducible nature of our consciousness and the fact that, related to that, there is no better life waiting for us after reunion with our immortal souls, (that is called a myth, not anything literally believed by the people you think you understand) you have made it very clear that you lack AGLAIA, that is, an immortal existence of your own: which is to say, that you are yourself reproducible, unenlightened, merely an event, a phenomenon consequent to another. You ever read the Indian epics- they are all about a great master tracking down his parallel selves in alternate realities to destroy them so that he can make himself ir-reproducible as a way of surviving the kalpas, that is, the cycle of karma and reincarnation through endless time. At any rate, you have told us that you have not apotheos-ed. But it is alright: Aglaia is a strange letter written on glass and water, and it changes its form every time someone looks at it: it is thus so hard to articulate or teach. As is written: “… but a maiden’s name written in mystery upon the water, though it were Truth; for the Truth is still, like the sea, and silent like her mourning,- THELOME BYTH EIKONII METHEXE ENNEAION PROTOLEPSOS OCEANUS”. [From the KALAGNOSEON ENZOLIDAID of Shem, or: the Un-knowing of the Silence of the Perfect Aeon: “The Will receives itself, like the sea the Will rendereth the will unto itself, and the first-intent of the ennoea is only an image-imprint.”] But it is what Gnosis refers to, conceived from the greatest vantage.

Gnosis is the multiplicitous- and duplicitous, representation of AGLA in time, namely as a fleeting and mutant sigil indicative of mastery over self, time, and gods. Those who carry its mark are the true bearers of light, the true gnostics. Aglaia is the mystery of the self, which is the self: it is what Hemaedion names the aleph-null level paradox, at the Grund; the paradox not of one logical system, or of one language, but the paradox of language itself:

“To affirm its existence is to refute it, and to deny its existence is to admit it. For,
if self-consciousness is included in the All-Being, it cannot be conscious of self: but if it
is not included in the All-Being, then the All-Being is not the All. This is the simplest
formulation of aleph-null, …”

^ You see, that is a razor. That cuts through things. Whatever you thought you were doing: that ain’t it chief.

The multiplicity of aglaia refers to the many yogic-paths of mastery that all lead to one place in Aglaia, to one place in the Immortal Self that has survived confronting the All and re-asserted its individuality in an act of celestial sabotage mirroring the act of the antisophic christ-devil of profane gnosis himself (Lucifer, Yaldabaoth, Prometheus, Zeus, Brahma, etc. etc.) in turning his back on the other angels to create the fallen physical world. One of these inner yogic-paths or ways to mastery being: the formation of a time-chrysalis to protect ourselves at the end of each karmic-aeon, again from Hermaedion:

" Of note, if one is to study the question of apotheosis fully, is the transaeonic theogony of Brahma-Siva, in which Creator and Created trade places through the cycles of karma in a reciprocal vortex of cosmic potencies gradually compressing the essence of consciousness into a singularity within its dizzying center, that it might be extracted from the aeon out of the supreme enjoyment of the inner yoga. Through the successive transitions of one karmic-aeon into another, Brahma became disaffected with the mortal creation and, turning away from it, remained in his introverted yogic-path and inner samadhi [enjoyment] for an entire cycle of karma. In his place as a now absent creator-god, recalling the mythic echoes of the same in the figure of a Phanes or YLDBTH, he installed Siva to take up the duties he neglected,- placing him in the middle of his heart-lotus, which had folded in on itself so many times through the aeons that Siva occupied an infinitesimal point at its center, such that through inner-contact with the creative-fire, he was burnt and became red instead of black, (the alchemical nigredo) taking up the color of Kala, the God of Time and Death, and finally, becoming the “golden androgynou” (in which the masculine and feminine powers of Brahma and Visnu were stabilized within Siva as a triune filiation of the theogony whose mystery, unfolding through the cycles of time, was and is the mystery of time itself, that is, the cycle of karma conceived at its widest scale) through whose fire the essence of Brahma was burnt up in a ritualistic purification on account of which Brahama returned slightly less and less at the end of each karmic-aeon, occupying for his part increasingly smaller roles or personae in the mythic dramatis, until finally, appearing as an inversion of himself,- (though having in just that way survived the aeon) not as the supreme creator but only the creation of Siva,- thus fulfilled by his diminishment in the scheme of creation the paradoxical Ardhanarisvara through whose yogic-path the great consciousness enjoys the other half of its own existence. Similarly, just as Yaldabaoth deliberately failed in his creation of mortal reality to match the glory of God, so that in this failure he could teach an entire race of beings to do as he envisioned, so Brahma deliberately allowed himself to be burnt up by Siva in order to teach us how to survive from one karmic-aeon into another, and thus maintain our identity or structure within the mythic narrative without diminishing, being erased, or inversion through the birth and death of different universes in the endless cycles of time."

(See, this stuff: it’s cool, or more properly- dank. And because dankness is one of the water-signs of AGLA, written into the mutating folds of spirit in time, so dankness is one of the signs of Truth- insofar as Truth is the Truth of aglaia. And your shit isn’t dank so.)

For my part, I am blocked behind like 7 different levels of time-chrysalis because I enfolded my lotus-fire into itself like 10 times to create an ‘impossible shape’ (the sigil of aglaia, in other words: the enlightened gnostic Self beyond all reproducibility, beyond all event: a singularity) that only exists in another dimension, so no petulant Siva is gonna harvest my soul-shard at the end of the world to be used to recycle the karma and help repopulate the next universe 47 trillion years after the last proton decays in this one; fuck that noise.

no my shit’s the dankest cuz mines is cold and purely mechanical. there’s no metaphysics to this, much less anything esoteric, spiritual or religious. the existential limitations found regarding the conditions of such a recurrence are phenomenological… pertaining to what an experience of such would be like, how it is made thinkable (here and now), and most importantly… what kind of theorizing about it can be meaningful philosophy. and one way that is not meaningful is trying to grasp the process as if it were cumulative and ordered in such a way that one can possess power over it, or control of it, through attaining enlightened knowledge. philosophy in this regard is nothing more than timidity before the prospect of the recurrence. it’s the ‘panic’ before the thought of it… the nervous scampering about to try and impose some direction to it. lol… like an rpg game, as it were, where you spend your time building your character’s attributes so to be ready for the next level. but the thing is, there is no ‘next level’ because experience isn’t phenomenologically accumulated over the successions of recurrence. just as you sit here now and dabble in that gnostic nonsense with the feeling that you’ve ‘got it’, so too have you done so through eternity… and it hasn’t made a damn bit of difference. you could’ve been studying dianetics instead and it wouldn’t have mattered one way or the other.

there is only one thing that is unconditionally, universally and absolutely persistent throughout this eternity of recurrence. only one thing that is always there. the drive to attain power and to enjoy oneself with no regard for the consequences beyond those that affect you directly. this is why your boy max stirner was the illest of the illest, btw. this dude was worth one hundred socrates.

naw man, vision is not a philosophical repository of the feeble words of man. vision is a naked sword. you need to lose your self-loathing morbidity, burn your books, get you’re weight up, and dare to go jogging during a thunderstorm or something. ‘all knowledge is knowledge of the body’ - spinoza

The moment there is any real proof of magic working, is the moment I believe we’re living in a simulation.

The big problem with discussing matters that precede language is that there is no language for it.

.

that don’t mean it don’t exist, ludwig

ah yes. the old ‘absence of evidence is not evidence of absence’ trick, more formally known as the argument from ignorance. this leaves you twiddling your thumbs with the burden of prooph. now W’s gonna hit you another way. he’s gonna ax you what you mean by ‘it’, and accuse you of putting a subject without any predicate, making your statement meaningless. it’s at the moment you try and describe something about this ‘it’ that you engage in your language… but if you do that, clearly the thing about which you speak is not beyond language. so you saw off the branch you’re sitting on when you do that… and this does not please ludwig.

there’s a great deal of emptiness to the very concept of the ineffable. the whole ‘negative theology’ thing where everybody wuz like ‘whatever you say about god is not what is about god’ stuff. this is why we gotta do a lot of passing by in silence.

I would tell Ludwig that by that same reasoning, we could not speak of such a thing as a thought.
Then I’d ask him if he’s free tonight.

“no my shit’s the dankest cuz mines is cold and purely mechanical. there’s no metaphysics to this, much less anything esoteric, spiritual or religious. the existential limitations found regarding the conditions of such a recurrence are phenomenological…”

Virgin superatheist autissimo darwinist vs chad synchromystic chaos magician/antisophic christ-devil with meme magic powers

See, the reason why all I can bother to write as response to you Prometh, is a meme, is because you’re apparently out of your element (anything involving words is generally out of your element, but I am being more particular as far as metaphysics goes) and you have no response to me.

Yeah I get that it’s phenomenological. But the whole point is that consciousness is not phenomenologically closed, as Heidegger claims (after Nietzsche) it is, naming such a closure Dasein, or as Ludwig had once claimed on the grounds of linguistic limitations as far as the exploration of consciousness goes. Again, Ludwig retracted his whole shit about logical positivism so he isn’t even really relevant to it. Suffice it say: you attempting to ground an explanation of consciousness on physical laws, on neural correlates,- on anything of the sort, is like explaining what the Mona Lisa is through a chemical analysis of the dyes used in its construction. It doesn’t make sense. Consciousness must be explained in the terms of consciousness: meaning, via. a self-reflective process. Because our human capacity for self-reflection is infinite, (I can reflect on myself. I can reflect on myself reflecting on myself. I can reflect on myself reflecting on myself reflecting on myself… ad infinitum) it necessitates a transcendental or metaphysical conceptualization.

I will make that concrete: God is the abstraction of that entire infinitely recursive series of reflecting on myself reflecting on myself… God is the perfect mind abstracted as the end-point of that recursive function, a total self-reflective Mind embracing all of time and space and abstracted from all physical limitations. (Each time I go up a level in that process, I am abstracting my own consciousness from itself: I am gradually freeing myself from physical limitations, that is the point of self-reflection, especially when it is continued toward these transcendental heights of supercognisance, ie. philosophy.) God is the object of this series, a transcendental object upon which its possibility is grounded, in the same way that the ten trillion trillionth trillionth digit of PI exists even though nobody knows what it is, even though it has not been calculated yet. It is still there.

Metaphysics isn’t really about the world, the physical universe, it is about consciousness.

And as to Tab, you believing in magic whenever it is scientifically, empirically confirmed. Well it can’t be, the nature of magic is that it cannot be reproduced; it’s a singular event. But that goes for the creation of the universe itself, or of the multiverse assuming the later is eternal; either way, the beginning is an irreproducible, “magical” event.

“you need to lose your self-loathing morbidity, burn your books, get you’re weight up, and dare to go jogging during a thunderstorm or something.”

I never possessed any self-loathing morbidity. My books? Well I already read em’, to quote Cape Fear. So there is not much point to burning them. “Get YOUR” weight up: yeah I did, quite some time ago, and I took to exercising in my self-imposed cell to relieve my boredom. Do you aim to witness my godlike abs as well?

You need to expand your mind dawg.

no no, what i mean by ‘phenomenological’ is that a close examination of the ‘what-it-is-like-ness’ of experience would significantly change the conclusions you might make regarding the importance of this gnostic crap when considering the idea of the ‘eternal return’. the very notion of there being a series of gradations - levels you ascend to each time you achieve some kind of philosophical insight - and that the nature of experience, at each instance it occurs, might be qualitatively different - depending on what philosophical knowledge was gained during the last time - is missing the facts about the nature and structure of experience. there is only the NOW, and each now is structured in the same way as any other. you ‘take nothing with you’ as you move on to the next one, and nothing you did or didn’t do in the last one changes anything about these phenomenological structures… the ‘what it is like’ to be conscious.

and of course this is all in theory anyway. it is physically possible for there to be a repetition of events an infinite number of times in a universe properly disposed to let that happen (finite energy, unlimited space/time), yes, but we don’t know enough about the universe to venture this thought as more than a theory. but i can tell you this; if the ER is true, no amount of philosophizing carries over into each recurrence. or i should say, no amount makes any difference regarding what is to happen. this is because there is no ‘migration’ of souls. the soul, like the body, is reproduced during each recurrence… it doesn’t survive the last annihilation and then carry over into its next existence the qualia it had accumulated before. you can read plotinus, angela lansbury or field and stream. duddin’t matter.

to be sure, metaphysics is a very, very limited ‘field’ of philosophy that deals with the psychologistic foundations of our ability to produce deductive/a priori concepts about what is physical/empirical. in any case, metaphysics certainly is not some ‘study of consciousness’, unless you’ve already committed ryle’s category mistake and are talking about consciousness as if it were an entity, agent or a container of ideas.

and i say ‘very limited’ because there are only a few truly self-evident ‘a priori’ propositions about the world (spinoza covered these). if you want a great example of something that passes as metaphysics, but is not, see aristotle’s ‘four causes’ thesis.

omg dude. the only reason those abs are jumping out like that is because you’ve got like zero body-fat. everybody’s got abs like that, bro. but you can’t see em because THEY EAT. if i wasn’t such a fat sonofabitch myself my abs would be like ‘YO!’

" no no, what i mean by ‘phenomenological’ is that a close examination of the ‘what-it-is-like-ness’ of experience would significantly change the conclusions you might make regarding the importance of this gnostic crap when considering the idea of the ‘eternal return’. the very notion of there being a series of gradations - levels you ascend to each time you achieve some kind of philosophical insight - and that the nature of experience, at each instance it occurs, might be qualitatively different - depending on what philosophical knowledge was gained during the last time - is missing the facts about the nature and structure of experience. there is only the NOW, and each now is structured in the same way as any other. "

Yes, I know that is what you mean. That is what phenomenology is; the hypothesis of a certain pre-existing structure of experience in pre-reflection, on which basis a grounded study of experience in general, that is, in its apparent multiplicity, might be conducted. That reducibility [I would add: all reductionism is to be avoided. A philosophy that makes no space for the new- that does not preserve the category of the Negative and attempts to, like Hegel, “negate the negation” and convert negativity into positive knowledge,- is unworthy of the [b]AGON [/b]and bears nothing of AGLAIA.] and that omnipresent, homogeneous “now” is abhorrent to me, viscerally: but also intellectually. I believe that school of philosophy is yet another head of the Hydra- a perverted search for Utopia and a pre-existing unity (the structure of experience, which you rightly mention as being fundamental to phenomenological study) buried by ‘the awful racialist hetero-normative’ reflective cognition and the distorting lens of a historical-form, be that form a racial identity, a national identity, a gender identity, etc. (Such historical-forms would be merely artificial distortions and falsifications of the reducible NOW, which for phenomenology would mean the pre-existing structure of experience to which all experience can be reduced. Yes, that is a decadent philosophy from my perspective- but more importantly, wrong. Thus my politics and ethological nationalism touch upon even my metaphysics, for a historical-form like a national identity is, in my philosophy, irreducible to any pre-existing structure or NOW and actually serves as what Schelling calls an ectype- a metaphysical attractor and point of nucleation,- a generator for new ideas,- for philosophy, around which the materials needed for the emergence of a genuine, that is- a novel form of life, are gathered. One of the many goals of my new way of philosophizing, would be to intentionally produce these ectypes and ground novel forms of life in them: we aim to enlarge and deepen the idea of ‘life’ itself.) I am simply starting that I have abandoned (overcome; transcended) that entire premise and respective mode of thought. I state this explicitly in the following text:

"In the case of both Marx and Heidegger, we find the same neo-romantic search for pre-reflective unity,- for a lost utopia in which the difference of epoch, race, state, and identity is reduced merely to, in Dugin’s words, “pre-concepts and concepts”. Where Hegel constructed a grand schema,- (univocal metaphysics) grand in terms both of its fastidity and its inspired folly,- with which to convert philosophical negativity into affirmative knowledge, these two later thinkers go about the task by simply proclaiming such knowledge to exist imaginatively, that is, as a matter of intuition,- proposing a pre-existing structure of the imagination, be it called Dasein or species-essence; a structure preceding the individual and all formation of class, race, etc. Marx proclaims man to be alienated from his own essence due to the dehumanizing influence of industrialization, and still further, that this process of industrialization is internalized through the class-struggle (as false consciousness) in such a way as to produce from the species-essence, now buried in unconsciousness, exactly the kind of assembled creature or artifice that man, while at work in the factory line upon his artifices, has himself become, while for Heidegger, it is similarly a limitation of Ousia’s Horizon of Meaning that is at issue, and the metaphysical distortion of a lost essence,- of, in the later case, Dasein. In place of these ideas, we must put off the search for a pre-reflective unity with the subject, and enounce Being in its unabsorbed negativity. " (Negativity, ie. gnosis.)

I don’t want to distract from my on-topic post above this one, but: Haha, are you serious? Yeah, that’s the idea. My diet is protein shakes, vitamins, and lettuce to make myself feel full and dissuade me from eating between meals; then I exercise for a couple hours in my cave-room until I feel like I’m about to vomit, every day. However diet and exercise are only two of the three factors: if you do not have the right genetics, which dictate how exactly your body stores and distributes fat, no amount of diet or exercise will give you the full ten-pack effect, those lower 4 which aren’t even technically abs, you just have to have the genetics to make them visible. I can see/feel individual muscle fibers at this point. Is it healthy? Well I smoke three packs of cigarettes a day so that’s obviously not what I’m going for. I simply like the aesthetics of hyper-toned-ness.

Same here, funnily enough… but minus the eating and smoking habits and hours of exercising every day. I guess if you don’t get out or move much, then long workouts will compensate for that.

In regard to the op: I am very new to the notion of agnosticism… having only read-up on it in recent months… here at ILP, and if applied to myself, I would deem myself an Ignostic buddhist… as should all who follow the practice imo, as it was never meant to be a religion, and that it is, is of great annoyance to me.

This
72E67253-02F1-40A0-AB69-0DBD0524610E.jpeg has/holds meaning for the Practitioner… the Dharma… the most beautiful thing I ever did see, in my mind’s eye, exactly like that, without knowing what it was (back then) until a week or so ago. As parts of it swirled and rotated outwards and then back in or shooting off and upwards, I could not have been any more scared, but I don’t know why such a fear of such a beautiful thing had gripped me so.

I also came across this interesting chart, on my journey in search of answers, to phenomena that I just can’t explain, but now understand.

9B1B4A51-C3C0-4D11-B37A-C825FF20745A.jpeg
DBD31CE3-80C8-4EC5-9027-B68744FB15FA.jpeg

Not only is my mind superior to yours, but soon my abs will be too.

I’m comin’ for ya, Parodites

Lololol… I’m happy to be judge, and Phon… if she ever gets back here. :confusion-shrug: