GnosticPaul

Hello, I am new to the forum - and to introduce myself, I am a theist; more specifically a Muslim Sufi (a mystic genre of Islam). I hope I can contribute somewhat and with humility to the oldest debate known to man.

The name of the post was at the top of an e-mail that someone sent me, and I took it as one of those synchronicities that occur in everyday life that I consider to be 'manna from heaven,' food for the spirit, or minor miracles. Also, please excuse my entheogenic reference - for me at least, when the topic of transcendance or lack thereof arises, I cannot help but mention the role psychedelics have in personal beliefs.

I find it quite sad that individuals who very likely have taken moderate to large doses of psychedelics have not been 'given' the occasion to "discorporate," to use the term from the Frank Zappa song ("...it means to leave the body.") What I frequently encounter are dyed-in-the-wool materialists who have probably not accepted (which is a matter of faith) a mind-set, a model, that allows for the disengagement of mind from body, and a more complete identification with spirit. In other words, the basic model from Plato to Paul to Huxley to Alex Grey, is lacking among those who rant and rave against 'religion.' Traditionally, atheists.

Two clarifications are in order: Firstly, by leaving the body, I don't mean an astral projection. That is still 'in the body,' just a more subtle body. I mean something far more profound - the realization that who and what we essentially are is Consciousness - referred to back in the day as spirit. Consciousness, at its deepest level is characterized by timelessness and intensity, while at the shallower levels there is movement, change, and extension in space (our mind-body). Consciousness is not a thing or a substance, so the idea of boundaries does not apply. The mind-body has boundaries defined by the ego (MY thoughts, MY body). If a person can't grasp this, there is no sense pursuing this line of reasoning any further. Such a person can't experience him/herself as Consciousness (spirit); and perhaps this inability creates the frustration and anger that lies and denies that it is possible.

The second point for clarification, is what Huxley himself said in 'The Perennial Philosophy' when he suggested that 'mind' was "amphibious." Analogous to an amphibious creature that can be at home on land or in the water, 'mind' can identify itself with 'matter' (the body), or it can identify itself with 'spirit' (Consciousness). There is a third category - the intellectual - for whom ideas are the thing that matters most. They are usually eccentric, self-absorbed in their own interests, and generally avoided as geeks, except by other intellectuals. They miss the the earthly pleasures of the flesh as well as the sublime ecstasies of the spirit.

The Gnostics (generally speaking) spoke of people in these three categories: those of the flesh (Sarkics or Hylics); those of the mind (Psychics); and those of the spirit (Pneumatics). The Psychics could be brought to the level of awareness that the Pneumatics could enjoin, but the Hylics' minds were sunken in their bodily processes to such an extent that they considered their own minds and thoughts to be little more than products of their bodies - much like people today who refer to themselves as 'intellectual meat.' Hylics are the materialists of today. I once shared their mind set; morphed into a Psychic during my early years of quest through ceremonial magic; and morphed again into a more Pneumatic person with psychedelics and new models. I mention this because unlike certain Gnostics or their Eastern Hindu counterparts, I do not belive in a fixed, spiritual caste system.

Contrary to "the fool" who "says in his heart, There is no God," the real lie is living as though one were not a being who draws moment-to-moment existence from the Ground of Being. The real absurdity is to see only individuality, to only see 'the ten thousand things,' and NOT to perceive Oneness. Not to see spiritually, or to act spiritually are what the stories about Jesus healing the blind and crippled are all about in the New Testament. Those who do not experience the underlying reality of spirit, are like fish who do not know they are in water, and not only in water, but created mostly of water. Those who experience their true natures Know that in God, "we live and move and have our being." (Acts).

Cheers,

Abdul Hamid Ali

Bill

Preliminarily, let me welcome you to our forum. We don't get anywhere near enough Muslims around here, and I can't recall another Sufi, so I'm sure that you can add some new perspectives to our discussions. Again, welcome, and please do stick around.

With that said, I have a few questions that will hopefully allow us to get to know and understand your ideas better.

First, you ought to make clear which "Huxley" you are referring to. "The Perennial Philosophy" was by Aldous Huxley, and not any of the other famous Huxley's of the past century-and-a-half. Aldous was known to be a drinker and drug addict, as well as a prolific writer of fiction. Unfortunately, he does not have a reputation of being a clear thinker, like his grandfather does. I far prefer the writings of his grandfather, Thomas Henry Huxley.

With that said, why would you credit Aldous Huxley for "The Perennial Philosophy," when that work was really a compilation of work from other authors? (See the discussion of this same topic, here, where Huxley's version is discussed.)

Second, are you aware that the word "discorporate" wasn't first used by Frank Zappa, but rather by Robert Heinlein in his novel "Stranger in a Strange Land"? The genetically-human but mentally-martian protagonist uses the word to refer to the moment of death, when the soul (spirit) leaves the body and returns to the spirit world. The word may well have even older usages, but it certainly wasn't first used by Zappa!

Third, how much have you studied modern scientific findings about the relationship between the brain and the mind? The bottom line of those studies is that it is increasingly difficult to maintain a belief in a "spirit" (or "soul"), or in "mind-body dualism," in light of those scientific findings. (I agree that science can never exterminate the idea of a "soul" as an object of faith, but faith can always overrule science. ) An outline of the debate is available on-line here. Mental materialism is increasingly becoming the default position, thus necessitating a great deal more facts and arguments for you to prevail in your assertions of dualism and related phenomena.

Finally, many of us here will well-understand how drugs and mental exercises of various sorts can lead one to "experience a (seemingly) transcendental reality." I lived for several years among the followers of the Majarishi Mahesh Yogi of Transcendental Meditation (TM) fame. I'm pretty familiar with the techniques used, and in many cases, they amount to a form of self-deception. So, how familiar are you with the studies of these experiences which seemingly validate that these experiences, while very "real" in every sense, are still mere figments of the person's own imagination?

Thanks, and I look forward to your reply.

== Bill