Thanks for the answers and contributions of everyone so far. Some good points have been made, and I'm glad that you were able to respond, Mark. I was intentionally trying to cast a wide net, because I knew the answers varied.
Thomas, thank you for bringing up the distinctions between different varieties of panentheism. My own belief is that of
panen-theism (God infusing nature, yet ultimately transcendent), and I hold that this applies to each of us as a self-contained Spiritual Unit. I am
not a believer in the monad as taught by Liebniz -
having no doors or windows.
The Monad, to the best of my reckoning, is a
Spark in God's Flame. If you watch a candle, there are occasional
sparks that flash temporarily into and back out of existence - perhaps due to impurities in the wick. There is much food here for thought, and hint enough, whether one is Gnostically inclined or otherwise.
Mind you (and me, and everyone -
Mahat, i.e.), even the "flash" (wordplay - flesh) into the world of
phenomenal appearance for each spark, is only
apparent separation, or isolation, relative to the parent Flame. The sparks could
in no wise exist were it not for the Flame.
So you see, the
dire heresy of separateness, as they say in the East, seems to me - the very
idea ... that each of us,
as a spark, somehow
actually exists, or even
could exist, apart from our Parent Source, the
Flame. No such could be, for even the
wick, the
upadhi, as
mulaprakriti, is PART of the pleroma.
Or is it?
I think Christ is the
in-between in the Divine equation of Spirit + matter. This is like God in the Highest, interacting with
God in the lowest, yielding a
natural result. The birth of Christ (or
consciousness, as a Universal Principle), is something that I think God planned from the very beginning. And while this may sound impersonal,
as a Principle, it is difficult to look at a newborn baby and not
feel the Goodness, or even SEE it, in the baby's smile. So I think the Divine potential,
that Spark, is there ... clothed in the form of a
future Son of God (Divine
potential) which is clothed in the form of human being -
or Humanity (as the One incarnation of THE Spiritual Soul,
singular).
Your post really speaks to me, InLove. As you say, we might express similar ideas in a different form, but I think they embody the same truths. When it comes to disagreement, I find I often stray to one or the other extreme of
two pieces of wisdom ... offered by the same Apostle:
"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal." - and the rest of I Cor, ch. 13, ending with - "But now abideth faith, hope, love, these three; and the greatest of these is love."
vs.
"Beware lest any man spoil you, through philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men, after the rudiments of the world and not after Christ." (Colossians 2:8)
It is as if St. Paul is here echoing the words of His Master, wherein Christ says,
"Be ye wise, as serpents, and harmless, as doves." But these are like the two wings of a single bird, and if we only have one, we tend to go around in circles!
And Dondi, although I am not thoroughly Gnostic (and I know you're not either), I have come to understand much of what you're describing in more allegorical, or symbolic terms. So again, I think it's as InLove (Debora?) is saying ... language, even thought, and certainly sometimes theological or interpretative differences - as standing in the way,
yet perhaps we have more of a shared understanding than we realize!
wil, your post reminds me of some of my contemplations of late, very much inspired by the artwork of
Athanasius Kircher. Truly a "dude of wonders," as one enthusiast puts it, the image that comes to mind is the frontispiece of his
Ars magna lucis et umbrae, or
`The Great Art of Light and Darkness.'
Peace,
~Zag
