Tuesday, February 03, 2009
Here's my bio as it appears on Myspace:
In the fourth grade Mr. Jones began playing the French Horn. When he was ten he began playing guitar. Highly influenced by the Beatles at the time, he wrote his first song: "Sgt. Hatred" a ballad about a military man who gave no regard to human rights, which was later stolen and adapted into a character on the show "Venture Brothers." After a tragic pool party/show at the age of eleven his music began to shift gears. In the eight grade he began to get into pop-punk and later into hardcore and emo. In high school he formed a band with his friends called Man/External who was later renamed HasTheBoyFallen. The band eventually broke up, but Mr. Jones kept the name and used it for his solo works. He recorded an ep at Watchmen studios with his friend from HasTheBoyFallen/Man/External called "The War Inside My Brain." After a tragic car accident involving some of his closest friends he recorded the album "The World After April" named after a line from Ursula K. LeGuin's "The Lathe of Heaven." Although influenced by emo at the time, Mr. Jones never left his folk roots. He took lessons from Rochester folk-hero the late Dennis Monroe who taught him finger picking and other folk styles. His next album "Besar o no Besar" was a departure from previous work. After receiving a digital four track for a graduation present he began to get into experimentation and home recording. He also got back to his old influences, the Beatles and Pink Floyd. After entering college he took on the alias Dorian Gray after the Oscar Wilde novel. He put out many psychedelic, home recorded cassette tapes under this name, some of which include "Psychonaut", the anthemic "Metaphysical Sponge", and "The Tree of Life vol. I-IV." He later dropped the name Dorian Gray and began playing just as Mitch Jones. His most recent albums include "And then a Plank, in reason broke" under the name the Fantastic Electric Light Box and "Psalms."
In the fourth grade Mr. Jones began playing the French Horn. When he was ten he began playing guitar. Highly influenced by the Beatles at the time, he wrote his first song: "Sgt. Hatred" a ballad about a military man who gave no regard to human rights, which was later stolen and adapted into a character on the show "Venture Brothers." After a tragic pool party/show at the age of eleven his music began to shift gears. In the eight grade he began to get into pop-punk and later into hardcore and emo. In high school he formed a band with his friends called Man/External who was later renamed HasTheBoyFallen. The band eventually broke up, but Mr. Jones kept the name and used it for his solo works. He recorded an ep at Watchmen studios with his friend from HasTheBoyFallen/Man/External called "The War Inside My Brain." After a tragic car accident involving some of his closest friends he recorded the album "The World After April" named after a line from Ursula K. LeGuin's "The Lathe of Heaven." Although influenced by emo at the time, Mr. Jones never left his folk roots. He took lessons from Rochester folk-hero the late Dennis Monroe who taught him finger picking and other folk styles. His next album "Besar o no Besar" was a departure from previous work. After receiving a digital four track for a graduation present he began to get into experimentation and home recording. He also got back to his old influences, the Beatles and Pink Floyd. After entering college he took on the alias Dorian Gray after the Oscar Wilde novel. He put out many psychedelic, home recorded cassette tapes under this name, some of which include "Psychonaut", the anthemic "Metaphysical Sponge", and "The Tree of Life vol. I-IV." He later dropped the name Dorian Gray and began playing just as Mitch Jones. His most recent albums include "And then a Plank, in reason broke" under the name the Fantastic Electric Light Box and "Psalms."
got two shows coming up at top secret underground locations (no pigs!):
02/20/2009 08:00 PM - Meddlesome Meddlesome Meddlesome Laboratory
Rochester, New York 14607
US
Cost:free
Description:Me and Oliver/Reeg and Graham
02/15/2009 08:00 PM - the Right Now
Rochester, New York 14607
US
Cost:free
Description:with Forgotten Figures Falling Together Between Two Twigs and one other that I can’t remember the name
02/20/2009 08:00 PM - Meddlesome Meddlesome Meddlesome Laboratory
Rochester, New York 14607
US
Cost:free
Description:Me and Oliver/Reeg and Graham
02/15/2009 08:00 PM - the Right Now
Rochester, New York 14607
US
Cost:free
Description:with Forgotten Figures Falling Together Between Two Twigs and one other that I can’t remember the name
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
The Gnostic World View:
A Brief Summary of Gnosticism
GNOSTICISM IS THE TEACHING based on Gnosis, the knowledge of transcendence arrived at by way of interior, intuitive means. Although Gnosticism thus rests on personal religious experience, it is a mistake to assume all such experience results in Gnostic recognitions. It is nearer the truth to say that Gnosticism expresses a specific religious experience, an experience that does not lend itself to the language of theology or philosophy, but which is instead closely affinitized to, and expresses itself through, the medium of myth. Indeed, one finds that most Gnostic scriptures take the forms of myths. The term “myth” should not here be taken to mean “stories that are not true”, but rather, that the truths embodied in these myths are of a different order from the dogmas of theology or the statements of philosophy.
In the following summary, we will attempt to encapsulate in prose what the Gnostic myths express in their distinctively poetic and imaginative language.
The Cosmos
All religious traditions acknowledge that the world is imperfect. Where they differ is in the explanations which they offer to account for this imperfection and in what they suggest might be done about it. Gnostics have their own -- perhaps quite startling -- view of these matters: they hold that the world is flawed because it was created in a flawed manner.
Like Buddhism, Gnosticism begins with the fundamental recognition that earthly life is filled with suffering. In order to nourish themselves, all forms of life consume each other, thereby visiting pain, fear, and death upon one another (even herbivorous animals live by destroying the life of plants). In addition, so-called natural catastrophes -- earthquakes, floods, fires, drought, volcanic eruptions -- bring further suffering and death in their wake. Human beings, with their complex physiology and psychology, are aware not only of these painful features of earthly existence. They also suffer from the frequent recognition that they are strangers living in a world that is flawed and absurd.
Many religions advocate that humans are to be blamed for the imperfections of the world. Supporting this view, they interpret the Genesis myth as declaring that transgressions committed by the first human pair brought about a “fall” of creation resulting in the present corrupt state of the world. Gnostics respond that this interpretation of the myth is false. The blame for the world’s failings lies not with humans, but with the creator. Since -- especially in the monotheistic religions -- the creator is God, this Gnostic position appears blasphemous, and is often viewed with dismay even by non-believers.
Ways of evading the recognition of the flawed creation and its flawed creator have been devised over and over, but none of these arguments have impressed Gnostics. The ancient Greeks, especially the Platonists, advised people to look to the harmony of the universe, so that by venerating its grandeur they might forget their immediate afflictions. But since this harmony still contains the cruel flaws, forlornness and alienation of existence, this advice is considered of little value by Gnostics. Nor is the Eastern idea of Karma regarded by Gnostics as an adequate explanation of creation’s imperfection and suffering. Karma at best can only explain how the chain of suffering and imperfection works. It does not inform us in the first place why such a sorrowful and malign system should exist.
Once the initial shock of the “unusual” or “blasphemous” nature of the Gnostic explanation for suffering and imperfection of the world wears off, one may begin to recognize that it is in fact the most sensible of all explanations. To appreciate it fully, however, a familiarity with the Gnostic conception of the Godhead is required, both in its original essence as the True God and in its debased manifestation as the false or creator God.
Deity
The Gnostic God concept is more subtle than that of most religions. In its way, it unites and reconciles the recognitions of Monotheism and Polytheism, as well as of Theism, Deism and Pantheism.
William BlakeIn the Gnostic view, there is a true, ultimate and transcendent God, who is beyond all created universes and who never created anything in the sense in which the word “create” is ordinarily understood. While this True God did not fashion or create anything, He (or, It) “emanated” or brought forth from within Himself the substance of all there is in all the worlds, visible and invisible. In a certain sense, it may therefore be true to say that all is God, for all consists of the substance of God. By the same token, it must also be recognized that many portions of the original divine essence have been projected so far from their source that they underwent unwholesome changes in the process. To worship the cosmos, or nature, or embodied creatures is thus tantamount to worshipping alienated and corrupt portions of the emanated divine essence.
The basic Gnostic myth has many variations, but all of these refer to Aeons, intermediate deific beings who exist between the ultimate, True God and ourselves. They, together with the True God, comprise the realm of Fullness (Pleroma) wherein the potency of divinity operates fully. The Fullness stands in contrast to our existential state, which in comparison may be called emptiness.
One of the aeonial beings who bears the name Sophia (“Wisdom”) is of great importance to the Gnostic world view. In the course of her journeyings, Sophia came to emanate from her own being a flawed consciousness, a being who became the creator of the material and psychic cosmos, all of which he created in the image of his own flaw. This being, unaware of his origins, imagined himself to be the ultimate and absolute God. Since he took the already existing divine essence and fashioned it into various forms, he is also called the Demiurgos or “half-maker” There is an authentic half, a true deific component within creation, but it is not recognized by the half-maker and by his cosmic minions, the Archons or “rulers”.
The Human Being
Human nature mirrors the duality found in the world: in part it was made by the false creator God and in part it consists of the light of the True God. Humankind contains a perishable physical and psychic component, as well as a spiritual component which is a fragment of the divine essence. This latter part is often symbolically referred to as the “divine spark”. The recognition of this dual nature of the world and of the human being has earned the Gnostic tradition the epithet of “dualist”.
Humans are generally ignorant of the divine spark resident within them. This ignorance is fostered in human nature by the influence of the false creator and his Archons, who together are intent upon keeping men and women ignorant of their true nature and destiny. Anything that causes us to remain attached to earthly things serves to keep us in enslavement to these lower cosmic rulers. Death releases the divine spark from its lowly prison, but if there has not been a substantial work of Gnosis undertaken by the soul prior to death, it becomes likely that the divine spark will be hurled back into, and then re-embodied within, the pangs and slavery of the physical world.
Not all humans are spiritual (pneumatics) and thus ready for Gnosis and liberation. Some are earthbound and materialistic beings (hyletics), who recognize only the physical reality. Others live largely in their psyche (psychics). Such people usually mistake the Demiurge for the True God and have little or no awareness of the spiritual world beyond matter and mind.
In the course of history, humans progress from materialistic sensate slavery, by way of ethical religiosity, to spiritual freedom and liberating Gnosis. As the scholar G. Quispel wrote: “The world-spirit in exile must go through the Inferno of matter and the Purgatory of morals to arrive at the spiritual Paradise.” This kind of evolution of consciousness was envisioned by the Gnostics, long before the concept of evolution was known.
Salvation
Evolutionary forces alone are insufficient, however, to bring about spiritual freedom. Humans are caught in a predicament consisting of physical existence combined with ignorance of their true origins, their essential nature and their ultimate destiny. To be liberated from this predicament, human beings require help, although they must also contribute their own efforts.
From earliest times Messengers of the Light have come forth from the True God in order to assist humans in their quest for Gnosis. Only a few of these salvific figures are mentioned in Gnostic scripture; some of the most important are Seth (the third Son of Adam), Jesus, and the Prophet Mani. The majority of Gnostics always looked to Jesus as the principal savior figure (the Soter).
Gnostics do not look to salvation from sin (original or other), but rather from the ignorance of which sin is a consequence. Ignorance -- whereby is meant ignorance of spiritual realities -- is dispelled only by Gnosis, and the decisive revelation of Gnosis is brought by the Messengers of Light, especially by Christ, the Logos of the True God. It is not by His suffering and death but by His life of teaching and His establishing of mysteries that Christ has performed His work of salvation.
The Gnostic concept of salvation, like other Gnostic concepts, is a subtle one. On the one hand, Gnostic salvation may easily be mistaken for an unmediated individual experience, a sort of spiritual do-it-yourself project. Gnostics hold that the potential for Gnosis, and thus, of salvation is present in every man and woman, and that salvation is not vicarious but individual. At the same time, they also acknowledge that Gnosis and salvation can be, indeed must be, stimulated and facilitated in order to effectively arise within consciousness. This stimulation is supplied by Messengers of Light who, in addition to their teachings, establish salvific mysteries (sacraments) which can be administered by apostles of the Messengers and their successors.
One needs also remember that knowledge of our true nature -- as well as other associated realizations -- are withheld from us by our very condition of earthly existence. The True God of transcendence is unknown in this world, in fact He is often called the Unknown Father. It is thus obvious that revelation from on High is needed to bring about salvation. The indwelling spark must be awakened from its terrestrial slumber by the saving knowledge that comes “from without”.
Conduct
If the words “ethics” or “morality” are taken to mean a system of rules, then Gnosticism is opposed to them both. Such systems usually originate with the Demiurge and are covertly designed to serve his purposes. If, on the other hand, morality is said to consist of an inner integrity arising from the illumination of the indwelling spark, then the Gnostic will embrace this spiritually informed existential ethic as ideal.
To the Gnostic, commandments and rules are not salvific; they are not substantially conducive to salvation. Rules of conduct may serve numerous ends, including the structuring of an ordered and peaceful society, and the maintenance of harmonious relations within social groups. Rules, however, are not relevant to salvation; that is brought about only by Gnosis. Morality therefore needs to be viewed primarily in temporal and secular terms; it is ever subject to changes and modifications in accordance with the spiritual development of the individual.
As noted in the discussion above, “hyletic materialists” usually have little interest in morality, while “psychic disciplinarians” often grant to it a great importance. In contrast, “Pneumatic spiritual” persons are generally more concerned with other, higher matters. Different historical periods also require variant attitudes regarding human conduct. Thus both the Manichaean and Cathar Gnostic movements, which functioned in times where purity of conduct was regarded as an issue of high import, responded in kind. The present period of Western culture perhaps resembles in more ways that of second and third century Alexandria. It seems therefore appropriate that Gnostics in our age adopt the attitudes of classical Alexandrian Gnosticism, wherein matters of conduct were largely left to the insight of the individual.
Gnosticism embraces numerous general attitudes toward life: it encourages non-attachment and non-conformity to the world, a “being in the world, but not of the world”; a lack of egotism; and a respect for the freedom and dignity of other beings. Nonetheless, it appertains to the intuition and wisdom of every individual “Gnostic” to distill from these principles individual guidelines for their personal application.
Destiny
When Confucius was asked about death, he replied: “Why do you ask me about death when you do not know how to live?” This answer might easily have been given by a Gnostic. To a similar question posed in the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas, Jesus answered that human beings must come by Gnosis to know the ineffable, divine reality from whence they have originated, and whither they will return. This transcendental knowledge must come to them while they are still embodied on earth.
Death does not automatically bring about liberation from bondage in the realms of the Demiurge. Those who have not attained to a liberating Gnosis while they were in embodiment may become trapped in existence once more. It is quite likely that this might occur by way of the cycle of rebirths. Gnosticism does not emphasize the doctrine of reincarnation prominently, but it is implicitly understood in most Gnostic teachings that those who have not made effective contact with their transcendental origins while they were in embodiment would have to return into the sorrowful condition of earthly life.
In regard to salvation, or the fate of the spirit and soul after death, one needs to be aware that help is available. Valentinus, the greatest of Gnostic teachers, taught that Christ and Sophia await the spiritual man -- the pneumatic Gnostic -- at the entrance of the Pleroma, and help him to enter the bridechamber of final reunion. Ptolemaeus, disciple of Valentinus, taught that even those not of pneumatic status, the psychics, could be redeemed and live in a heavenworld at the entrance of the Pleroma. In the fullness of time, every spiritual being will receive Gnosis and will be united with its higher Self -- the angelic Twin -- thus becoming qualified to enter the Pleroma. None of this is possible, however, without earnest striving for Gnosis.
Gnosis and Psyche: The Depth Psychological Connection
Throughout the twentieth Century the new scientific discipline of depth psychology has gained much prominence. Among the depth psychologists who have shown a pronounced and informed interest in Gnosticism, a place of signal distinction belongs to C. G. Jung. Jung was instrumental in calling attention to the Nag Hammadi library of Gnostic writings in the 1950's because he perceived the outstanding psychological relevance of Gnostic insights.
Carl Gustav Jung, 1875 - 1961The noted scholar of Gnosticism, G. Filoramo, wrote: "Jung's reflections had long been immersed in the thought of the ancient Gnostics to such an extent that he considered them the virtual discoverers of 'depth psychology' . . . ancient Gnosis, albeit in its form of universal religion, in a certain sense prefigured, and at the same time helped to clarify, the nature of Jungian spiritual therapy." In the light of such recognitions one may ask: "Is Gnosticism a religion or a psychology?" The answer is that it may very-well be both. Most mythologems found in Gnostic scriptures possess psychological relevance and applicability. For instance the blind and arrogant creator-demiurge bears a close resemblance to the alienated human ego that has lost contact with the ontological Self. Also, the myth of Sophia resembles closely the story of the human psyche that loses its connection with the collective unconscious and needs to be rescued by the Self. Analogies of this sort exist in great profusion.
Many esoteric teachings have proclaimed, "As it is above, so it is below." Our psychological nature (the microcosm) mirrors metaphysical nature (the macrocosm), thus Gnosticism may possess both a psychological and a religious authenticity. Gnostic psychology and Gnostic religion need not be exclusive of one another but may complement each other within an implicit order of wholeness. Gnostics have always held that divinity is immanent within the human spirit, although it is not limited to it. The convergence of Gnostic religious teaching with psychological insight is thus quite understandable in terms of time-honored Gnostic principles.
Conclusion
Some writers make a distinction between “Gnosis” and “Gnosticism”. Such distinctions are both helpful and misleading. Gnosis is undoubtedly an experience based not in concepts and precepts, but in the sensibility of the heart. Gnosticism, on the other hand, is the world-view based on the experience of Gnosis. For this reason, in languages other than English, the word Gnosis is often used to denote both the experience and the world view (die Gnosis in German, la Gnose in French).
In a sense, there is no Gnosis without Gnosticism, for the experience of Gnosis inevitably calls forth a world view wherein it finds its place. The Gnostic world view is experiential, it is based on a certain kind of spiritual experience of Gnosis. Therefore, it will not do to omit, or to dilute, various parts of the Gnostic world view, for were one to do this, the world view would no longer conform to experience.
Theology has been called an intellectual wrapping around the spiritual kernel of a religion. If this is true, then it is also true that most religions are being strangled and stifled by their wrappings. Gnosticism does not run this danger, because its world view is stated in myth rather than in theology. Myths, including the Gnostic myths, may be interpreted in diverse ways. Transcendence, numinosity, as well as psychological archetypes along with other elements, play a role in such interpretation. Still, such mythic statements tell of profound truths that will not be denied.
Gnosticism can bring us such truths with a high authority, for it speaks with the voice of the highest part of the human -- the spirit. Of this spirit, it has been said, “it bloweth where it listeth”. This then is the reason why the Gnostic world view could not be extirpated in spite of many centuries of persecution.
The Gnostic world view has always been timely, for it always responded best to the “knowledge of the heart” that is true Gnosis. Yet today, its timeliness is increasing, for the end of the second millennium has seen the radical deterioration of many ideologies which evaded the great questions and answers addressed by Gnosticism. The clarity, frankness, and authenticity of the Gnostic answer to the questions of the human predicament cannot fail to impress and (in time) to convince. If your reactions to this summary have been of a similarly positive order, then perhaps you are a Gnostic yourself!
+ Stephan A. Hoeller (Tau Stephanus, Gnostic Bishop)
A Brief Summary of Gnosticism
GNOSTICISM IS THE TEACHING based on Gnosis, the knowledge of transcendence arrived at by way of interior, intuitive means. Although Gnosticism thus rests on personal religious experience, it is a mistake to assume all such experience results in Gnostic recognitions. It is nearer the truth to say that Gnosticism expresses a specific religious experience, an experience that does not lend itself to the language of theology or philosophy, but which is instead closely affinitized to, and expresses itself through, the medium of myth. Indeed, one finds that most Gnostic scriptures take the forms of myths. The term “myth” should not here be taken to mean “stories that are not true”, but rather, that the truths embodied in these myths are of a different order from the dogmas of theology or the statements of philosophy.
In the following summary, we will attempt to encapsulate in prose what the Gnostic myths express in their distinctively poetic and imaginative language.
The Cosmos
All religious traditions acknowledge that the world is imperfect. Where they differ is in the explanations which they offer to account for this imperfection and in what they suggest might be done about it. Gnostics have their own -- perhaps quite startling -- view of these matters: they hold that the world is flawed because it was created in a flawed manner.
Like Buddhism, Gnosticism begins with the fundamental recognition that earthly life is filled with suffering. In order to nourish themselves, all forms of life consume each other, thereby visiting pain, fear, and death upon one another (even herbivorous animals live by destroying the life of plants). In addition, so-called natural catastrophes -- earthquakes, floods, fires, drought, volcanic eruptions -- bring further suffering and death in their wake. Human beings, with their complex physiology and psychology, are aware not only of these painful features of earthly existence. They also suffer from the frequent recognition that they are strangers living in a world that is flawed and absurd.
Many religions advocate that humans are to be blamed for the imperfections of the world. Supporting this view, they interpret the Genesis myth as declaring that transgressions committed by the first human pair brought about a “fall” of creation resulting in the present corrupt state of the world. Gnostics respond that this interpretation of the myth is false. The blame for the world’s failings lies not with humans, but with the creator. Since -- especially in the monotheistic religions -- the creator is God, this Gnostic position appears blasphemous, and is often viewed with dismay even by non-believers.
Ways of evading the recognition of the flawed creation and its flawed creator have been devised over and over, but none of these arguments have impressed Gnostics. The ancient Greeks, especially the Platonists, advised people to look to the harmony of the universe, so that by venerating its grandeur they might forget their immediate afflictions. But since this harmony still contains the cruel flaws, forlornness and alienation of existence, this advice is considered of little value by Gnostics. Nor is the Eastern idea of Karma regarded by Gnostics as an adequate explanation of creation’s imperfection and suffering. Karma at best can only explain how the chain of suffering and imperfection works. It does not inform us in the first place why such a sorrowful and malign system should exist.
Once the initial shock of the “unusual” or “blasphemous” nature of the Gnostic explanation for suffering and imperfection of the world wears off, one may begin to recognize that it is in fact the most sensible of all explanations. To appreciate it fully, however, a familiarity with the Gnostic conception of the Godhead is required, both in its original essence as the True God and in its debased manifestation as the false or creator God.
Deity
The Gnostic God concept is more subtle than that of most religions. In its way, it unites and reconciles the recognitions of Monotheism and Polytheism, as well as of Theism, Deism and Pantheism.
William BlakeIn the Gnostic view, there is a true, ultimate and transcendent God, who is beyond all created universes and who never created anything in the sense in which the word “create” is ordinarily understood. While this True God did not fashion or create anything, He (or, It) “emanated” or brought forth from within Himself the substance of all there is in all the worlds, visible and invisible. In a certain sense, it may therefore be true to say that all is God, for all consists of the substance of God. By the same token, it must also be recognized that many portions of the original divine essence have been projected so far from their source that they underwent unwholesome changes in the process. To worship the cosmos, or nature, or embodied creatures is thus tantamount to worshipping alienated and corrupt portions of the emanated divine essence.
The basic Gnostic myth has many variations, but all of these refer to Aeons, intermediate deific beings who exist between the ultimate, True God and ourselves. They, together with the True God, comprise the realm of Fullness (Pleroma) wherein the potency of divinity operates fully. The Fullness stands in contrast to our existential state, which in comparison may be called emptiness.
One of the aeonial beings who bears the name Sophia (“Wisdom”) is of great importance to the Gnostic world view. In the course of her journeyings, Sophia came to emanate from her own being a flawed consciousness, a being who became the creator of the material and psychic cosmos, all of which he created in the image of his own flaw. This being, unaware of his origins, imagined himself to be the ultimate and absolute God. Since he took the already existing divine essence and fashioned it into various forms, he is also called the Demiurgos or “half-maker” There is an authentic half, a true deific component within creation, but it is not recognized by the half-maker and by his cosmic minions, the Archons or “rulers”.
The Human Being
Human nature mirrors the duality found in the world: in part it was made by the false creator God and in part it consists of the light of the True God. Humankind contains a perishable physical and psychic component, as well as a spiritual component which is a fragment of the divine essence. This latter part is often symbolically referred to as the “divine spark”. The recognition of this dual nature of the world and of the human being has earned the Gnostic tradition the epithet of “dualist”.
Humans are generally ignorant of the divine spark resident within them. This ignorance is fostered in human nature by the influence of the false creator and his Archons, who together are intent upon keeping men and women ignorant of their true nature and destiny. Anything that causes us to remain attached to earthly things serves to keep us in enslavement to these lower cosmic rulers. Death releases the divine spark from its lowly prison, but if there has not been a substantial work of Gnosis undertaken by the soul prior to death, it becomes likely that the divine spark will be hurled back into, and then re-embodied within, the pangs and slavery of the physical world.
Not all humans are spiritual (pneumatics) and thus ready for Gnosis and liberation. Some are earthbound and materialistic beings (hyletics), who recognize only the physical reality. Others live largely in their psyche (psychics). Such people usually mistake the Demiurge for the True God and have little or no awareness of the spiritual world beyond matter and mind.
In the course of history, humans progress from materialistic sensate slavery, by way of ethical religiosity, to spiritual freedom and liberating Gnosis. As the scholar G. Quispel wrote: “The world-spirit in exile must go through the Inferno of matter and the Purgatory of morals to arrive at the spiritual Paradise.” This kind of evolution of consciousness was envisioned by the Gnostics, long before the concept of evolution was known.
Salvation
Evolutionary forces alone are insufficient, however, to bring about spiritual freedom. Humans are caught in a predicament consisting of physical existence combined with ignorance of their true origins, their essential nature and their ultimate destiny. To be liberated from this predicament, human beings require help, although they must also contribute their own efforts.
From earliest times Messengers of the Light have come forth from the True God in order to assist humans in their quest for Gnosis. Only a few of these salvific figures are mentioned in Gnostic scripture; some of the most important are Seth (the third Son of Adam), Jesus, and the Prophet Mani. The majority of Gnostics always looked to Jesus as the principal savior figure (the Soter).
Gnostics do not look to salvation from sin (original or other), but rather from the ignorance of which sin is a consequence. Ignorance -- whereby is meant ignorance of spiritual realities -- is dispelled only by Gnosis, and the decisive revelation of Gnosis is brought by the Messengers of Light, especially by Christ, the Logos of the True God. It is not by His suffering and death but by His life of teaching and His establishing of mysteries that Christ has performed His work of salvation.
The Gnostic concept of salvation, like other Gnostic concepts, is a subtle one. On the one hand, Gnostic salvation may easily be mistaken for an unmediated individual experience, a sort of spiritual do-it-yourself project. Gnostics hold that the potential for Gnosis, and thus, of salvation is present in every man and woman, and that salvation is not vicarious but individual. At the same time, they also acknowledge that Gnosis and salvation can be, indeed must be, stimulated and facilitated in order to effectively arise within consciousness. This stimulation is supplied by Messengers of Light who, in addition to their teachings, establish salvific mysteries (sacraments) which can be administered by apostles of the Messengers and their successors.
One needs also remember that knowledge of our true nature -- as well as other associated realizations -- are withheld from us by our very condition of earthly existence. The True God of transcendence is unknown in this world, in fact He is often called the Unknown Father. It is thus obvious that revelation from on High is needed to bring about salvation. The indwelling spark must be awakened from its terrestrial slumber by the saving knowledge that comes “from without”.
Conduct
If the words “ethics” or “morality” are taken to mean a system of rules, then Gnosticism is opposed to them both. Such systems usually originate with the Demiurge and are covertly designed to serve his purposes. If, on the other hand, morality is said to consist of an inner integrity arising from the illumination of the indwelling spark, then the Gnostic will embrace this spiritually informed existential ethic as ideal.
To the Gnostic, commandments and rules are not salvific; they are not substantially conducive to salvation. Rules of conduct may serve numerous ends, including the structuring of an ordered and peaceful society, and the maintenance of harmonious relations within social groups. Rules, however, are not relevant to salvation; that is brought about only by Gnosis. Morality therefore needs to be viewed primarily in temporal and secular terms; it is ever subject to changes and modifications in accordance with the spiritual development of the individual.
As noted in the discussion above, “hyletic materialists” usually have little interest in morality, while “psychic disciplinarians” often grant to it a great importance. In contrast, “Pneumatic spiritual” persons are generally more concerned with other, higher matters. Different historical periods also require variant attitudes regarding human conduct. Thus both the Manichaean and Cathar Gnostic movements, which functioned in times where purity of conduct was regarded as an issue of high import, responded in kind. The present period of Western culture perhaps resembles in more ways that of second and third century Alexandria. It seems therefore appropriate that Gnostics in our age adopt the attitudes of classical Alexandrian Gnosticism, wherein matters of conduct were largely left to the insight of the individual.
Gnosticism embraces numerous general attitudes toward life: it encourages non-attachment and non-conformity to the world, a “being in the world, but not of the world”; a lack of egotism; and a respect for the freedom and dignity of other beings. Nonetheless, it appertains to the intuition and wisdom of every individual “Gnostic” to distill from these principles individual guidelines for their personal application.
Destiny
When Confucius was asked about death, he replied: “Why do you ask me about death when you do not know how to live?” This answer might easily have been given by a Gnostic. To a similar question posed in the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas, Jesus answered that human beings must come by Gnosis to know the ineffable, divine reality from whence they have originated, and whither they will return. This transcendental knowledge must come to them while they are still embodied on earth.
Death does not automatically bring about liberation from bondage in the realms of the Demiurge. Those who have not attained to a liberating Gnosis while they were in embodiment may become trapped in existence once more. It is quite likely that this might occur by way of the cycle of rebirths. Gnosticism does not emphasize the doctrine of reincarnation prominently, but it is implicitly understood in most Gnostic teachings that those who have not made effective contact with their transcendental origins while they were in embodiment would have to return into the sorrowful condition of earthly life.
In regard to salvation, or the fate of the spirit and soul after death, one needs to be aware that help is available. Valentinus, the greatest of Gnostic teachers, taught that Christ and Sophia await the spiritual man -- the pneumatic Gnostic -- at the entrance of the Pleroma, and help him to enter the bridechamber of final reunion. Ptolemaeus, disciple of Valentinus, taught that even those not of pneumatic status, the psychics, could be redeemed and live in a heavenworld at the entrance of the Pleroma. In the fullness of time, every spiritual being will receive Gnosis and will be united with its higher Self -- the angelic Twin -- thus becoming qualified to enter the Pleroma. None of this is possible, however, without earnest striving for Gnosis.
Gnosis and Psyche: The Depth Psychological Connection
Throughout the twentieth Century the new scientific discipline of depth psychology has gained much prominence. Among the depth psychologists who have shown a pronounced and informed interest in Gnosticism, a place of signal distinction belongs to C. G. Jung. Jung was instrumental in calling attention to the Nag Hammadi library of Gnostic writings in the 1950's because he perceived the outstanding psychological relevance of Gnostic insights.
Carl Gustav Jung, 1875 - 1961The noted scholar of Gnosticism, G. Filoramo, wrote: "Jung's reflections had long been immersed in the thought of the ancient Gnostics to such an extent that he considered them the virtual discoverers of 'depth psychology' . . . ancient Gnosis, albeit in its form of universal religion, in a certain sense prefigured, and at the same time helped to clarify, the nature of Jungian spiritual therapy." In the light of such recognitions one may ask: "Is Gnosticism a religion or a psychology?" The answer is that it may very-well be both. Most mythologems found in Gnostic scriptures possess psychological relevance and applicability. For instance the blind and arrogant creator-demiurge bears a close resemblance to the alienated human ego that has lost contact with the ontological Self. Also, the myth of Sophia resembles closely the story of the human psyche that loses its connection with the collective unconscious and needs to be rescued by the Self. Analogies of this sort exist in great profusion.
Many esoteric teachings have proclaimed, "As it is above, so it is below." Our psychological nature (the microcosm) mirrors metaphysical nature (the macrocosm), thus Gnosticism may possess both a psychological and a religious authenticity. Gnostic psychology and Gnostic religion need not be exclusive of one another but may complement each other within an implicit order of wholeness. Gnostics have always held that divinity is immanent within the human spirit, although it is not limited to it. The convergence of Gnostic religious teaching with psychological insight is thus quite understandable in terms of time-honored Gnostic principles.
Conclusion
Some writers make a distinction between “Gnosis” and “Gnosticism”. Such distinctions are both helpful and misleading. Gnosis is undoubtedly an experience based not in concepts and precepts, but in the sensibility of the heart. Gnosticism, on the other hand, is the world-view based on the experience of Gnosis. For this reason, in languages other than English, the word Gnosis is often used to denote both the experience and the world view (die Gnosis in German, la Gnose in French).
In a sense, there is no Gnosis without Gnosticism, for the experience of Gnosis inevitably calls forth a world view wherein it finds its place. The Gnostic world view is experiential, it is based on a certain kind of spiritual experience of Gnosis. Therefore, it will not do to omit, or to dilute, various parts of the Gnostic world view, for were one to do this, the world view would no longer conform to experience.
Theology has been called an intellectual wrapping around the spiritual kernel of a religion. If this is true, then it is also true that most religions are being strangled and stifled by their wrappings. Gnosticism does not run this danger, because its world view is stated in myth rather than in theology. Myths, including the Gnostic myths, may be interpreted in diverse ways. Transcendence, numinosity, as well as psychological archetypes along with other elements, play a role in such interpretation. Still, such mythic statements tell of profound truths that will not be denied.
Gnosticism can bring us such truths with a high authority, for it speaks with the voice of the highest part of the human -- the spirit. Of this spirit, it has been said, “it bloweth where it listeth”. This then is the reason why the Gnostic world view could not be extirpated in spite of many centuries of persecution.
The Gnostic world view has always been timely, for it always responded best to the “knowledge of the heart” that is true Gnosis. Yet today, its timeliness is increasing, for the end of the second millennium has seen the radical deterioration of many ideologies which evaded the great questions and answers addressed by Gnosticism. The clarity, frankness, and authenticity of the Gnostic answer to the questions of the human predicament cannot fail to impress and (in time) to convince. If your reactions to this summary have been of a similarly positive order, then perhaps you are a Gnostic yourself!
+ Stephan A. Hoeller (Tau Stephanus, Gnostic Bishop)
pagan roots of christmas:
Why is Christmas on the 25th of December? The origins of Christmas lie in the Pagan festival of the son of Isis , which took place on December 25th. Partying, drinking and gift giving were traditions of this feast in ancient Babylon . There is evidence to suggest that if such a person as Jesus existed, he would have not been born in December, but sometime in September or October.
Christmas coincides with the winter Solstice (Saturnalia), which honors the God of Agriculture--Saturn. This celebration existed many, many years before the “birth of Christ.” In January they observed the Kalends of January, which represented the triumph of life over death. This whole season was called Dies Natalis Invicti Solis, the Birthday of the Unconquered Sun. The festival season is marked by much merrymaking. The tradition of Mummers was born in ancient Rome . The Mummers were groups of costumed singers and dancers who would travel from house to house entertaining their neighbors. From this, the Christmas tradition of caroling was born.
In northern Europe , many of the traditions that are considered part of the Christian worship were begun long before the participants had ever heard of Christ. The Pagans of northern Europe celebrated their own winter solstice, known as Yule. Yule was symbolic of the Pagan Sun God, Mithras, being born, and was observed on the shortest day of the year. As the God grew and matured, the days became longer and warmer. It was customary to light a candle to encourage Mithras, and the sun, to reappear next year.
Huge Yule logs
were burned in honor of the sun. The word Yule means “wheel,” the wheel being a Pagan symbol for the sun. Mistletoe began as a fertility ritual. Holly berries were thought to be a food of the gods.
The tree is the one symbol that unites almost all of the northern European winter solstices. It was customary for live evergreen trees to be brought into the homes as a reminder to inhabitants that soon their crops would grow again. Evergreen boughs were often carried as totems of good luck and were often present at weddings, representing fertility. The Druids used the tree as a religious symbol, holding their sacred ceremonies while surrounding and worshipping huge trees.
In the year 350, Pope Julius I declared that “Christ’s birth” would be celebrated on December 25th. There is little doubt that he was trying to make it easy for Pagan Romans (who were the majority at the time) to convert to Christianity. The new religion was a bit easier to swallow, knowing that their feasts would not be taken away from them.
Christmas (Christ-Mass) as it is known today, began in Germany , although Catholics and Lutherans disagree about which church celebrated it first. Not that this is surprising, as they rarely agree on anything. The earliest record of an evergreen being decorated in a Christian celebration was in 1521 in the Alsace region of Germany .
Why is Christmas on the 25th of December? The origins of Christmas lie in the Pagan festival of the son of Isis , which took place on December 25th. Partying, drinking and gift giving were traditions of this feast in ancient Babylon . There is evidence to suggest that if such a person as Jesus existed, he would have not been born in December, but sometime in September or October.
Christmas coincides with the winter Solstice (Saturnalia), which honors the God of Agriculture--Saturn. This celebration existed many, many years before the “birth of Christ.” In January they observed the Kalends of January, which represented the triumph of life over death. This whole season was called Dies Natalis Invicti Solis, the Birthday of the Unconquered Sun. The festival season is marked by much merrymaking. The tradition of Mummers was born in ancient Rome . The Mummers were groups of costumed singers and dancers who would travel from house to house entertaining their neighbors. From this, the Christmas tradition of caroling was born.
In northern Europe , many of the traditions that are considered part of the Christian worship were begun long before the participants had ever heard of Christ. The Pagans of northern Europe celebrated their own winter solstice, known as Yule. Yule was symbolic of the Pagan Sun God, Mithras, being born, and was observed on the shortest day of the year. As the God grew and matured, the days became longer and warmer. It was customary to light a candle to encourage Mithras, and the sun, to reappear next year.
Huge Yule logs
were burned in honor of the sun. The word Yule means “wheel,” the wheel being a Pagan symbol for the sun. Mistletoe began as a fertility ritual. Holly berries were thought to be a food of the gods. The tree is the one symbol that unites almost all of the northern European winter solstices. It was customary for live evergreen trees to be brought into the homes as a reminder to inhabitants that soon their crops would grow again. Evergreen boughs were often carried as totems of good luck and were often present at weddings, representing fertility. The Druids used the tree as a religious symbol, holding their sacred ceremonies while surrounding and worshipping huge trees.
In the year 350, Pope Julius I declared that “Christ’s birth” would be celebrated on December 25th. There is little doubt that he was trying to make it easy for Pagan Romans (who were the majority at the time) to convert to Christianity. The new religion was a bit easier to swallow, knowing that their feasts would not be taken away from them.
Christmas (Christ-Mass) as it is known today, began in Germany , although Catholics and Lutherans disagree about which church celebrated it first. Not that this is surprising, as they rarely agree on anything. The earliest record of an evergreen being decorated in a Christian celebration was in 1521 in the Alsace region of Germany .
A VERSION of Santanalia
by the bloody nos
HEAR HEAR
Now is the time to celebrate Santanalia!
Q: Why is Santanalia here?
A: Because Christian celebration is monopolizing this land. Many Christmas-celebrators simply have no idea that other cultures exist. Media sources tell us that the assertion of Happy Holidays is a sting in this side, the refusal to step down from empire status. Other folks celebrating other Holidays may likewise resist blending, but they do not have the experience of totally possessing a culture with their emblems and assertions. Above and beyond this social interplay, the land is steeped in longer and longer nights, shadow swallowing us in greater and greater darkness. Let us look into that darkness.
American Christian Empire forces an emphasis on light. The need to understand death is eclipsed by the reassurance of afterlife. Death outright frightens, and media pantomimes expose a cultural unwillingness to accept it. Thus culture is youth-obsessed, driven to increasing diversions, and collapsing under excess waste.
The new light is born upon the land: let us look upon the new light, sayeth the Christians. This is not the actual timing of the event in question, of course, but a natural tactic to place the ritual initiation of their empire in the midst of 1. extant celebrations and 2. the center of earth darkness (northern hemisphere).
Thus the season was hijacked. My impression is that early celebration of the new "Christmas" (year xxx) went along generally as before, regional celebrations based on local traditions, responding to the imposed rituals gradually or jarringly… after all, you cannot tell a man how to celebrate!
Or can you? Advent of electric entertainment cloaking corporate advertisement suddenly broadcast in all KINDS of instructions. Brands soothe, technology titillates. Products climb out of the glass face and populate our worlds. How we love our objects! It is only reasonable that, in a season given to communal reassurance, we share our feeling by giving beloved objects to people. This is the culture, and this is a fine thing. Santa, of course, approves – but Santa is dead now.
Santa has gone the way of Jupiter, hanging his great snowy face in the sky. He is a myth of a man, CEO among untermenschen, impossibly wealthy and apparently resourceful, even magical in his will to gift.
But Santa is dead now, going the way of the snow itself, and it falls upon our harried populace to tax their means and gift in the honor of Santa!
Santa-in-us agitates, mashes us up against each other. We are driven to co-mingle and dust off the old pagan traditions of Saturnalia: solstice awareness, disintegration of class, mischief and jolly-ness. For in the time of deepest night, the sought animal warmth of community omits any safety, except that which we respectfully incline towards each other.
That is a folk notion, and was the essential socialist idea (X) behind Christianity itself… but apparently, in latter days, this does not extend to folk beyond one's own cultural circle. In these times of post-globalization we must change the very practice of holiday celebration to participate in human community again.
In this way, we embrace the commonly extant holidays: Dark Solstice, Regal Chaunkkah, Pious Christmas, Righteous Kwanzaa & Crystal New Year. In that all impart gifts upon their celebrator, they are already practitioners of the Great Santanalia. And further – to the Muslims, the Atheists, the Hindis, the Satanist, the monks & acolytes – whose present body confers status in the Human Community.*
* Santa's rumored whiteness is based only on practical knowledge (North Pole exists in a tundra), but completely ignores the Hollow Earth theory, which has been discredited only by photographs. Santa could have been any kind of dude, really.
TAKE BACK THE HOLIDAYS
Santanalia is a three-week period beginning 21 days before the last day of Kwanzaa. Celebration styles vary widely, but invariably include social activity, preparation of objects & object exchange, and examination of the significant and daily occurrences of the preceding year. In the omnipresence of the night, it is potent time to participate in one's inner life. (Life changes might occur, but it is best not to force them.) It is from this interior practice that we generate the energy to fully celebrate, as well as prepare intentionally for the coming year.
RITES (in whatever order)
On the cusp of New Year, make a wish in the name of Santalia.
Gift-giving is most certainly NOT withheld for one particular day. The whole Holiday is ripe for receiving, and make certain to save some wrapped gift for January.
It is appropriate to overlap Santanalia with your traditional style of celebration. Santanalia is known soother for particular Holiday Hangover.
If commerce situations freak you out, it is totally acceptable to handcraft gift from the waste and excess of the past year.
Notice the birds and animals that actively scoutabout in this season. Give gifts to your favorite (they like simple food).
Give special thanks to an evergreen plant by decorating it while it is still in the ground. This includes cactus and other regional variance. There is also plenty of time to rescue cut trees from anxious Christmas-only households.
Santanalia lights are blues & indigoes.
Bend class rules at work holiday parties.
The importance of the Object was predominant to Santa, so shall it be to us. Use Santanalia as a time to revere all Objects – complex tools of perpetual use (home, vehicle, electronics) and simple Objects at hand; acknowledge them as people, ask how you can serve them.
by the bloody nos
HEAR HEAR
Now is the time to celebrate Santanalia!
Q: Why is Santanalia here?
A: Because Christian celebration is monopolizing this land. Many Christmas-celebrators simply have no idea that other cultures exist. Media sources tell us that the assertion of Happy Holidays is a sting in this side, the refusal to step down from empire status. Other folks celebrating other Holidays may likewise resist blending, but they do not have the experience of totally possessing a culture with their emblems and assertions. Above and beyond this social interplay, the land is steeped in longer and longer nights, shadow swallowing us in greater and greater darkness. Let us look into that darkness.
American Christian Empire forces an emphasis on light. The need to understand death is eclipsed by the reassurance of afterlife. Death outright frightens, and media pantomimes expose a cultural unwillingness to accept it. Thus culture is youth-obsessed, driven to increasing diversions, and collapsing under excess waste.
The new light is born upon the land: let us look upon the new light, sayeth the Christians. This is not the actual timing of the event in question, of course, but a natural tactic to place the ritual initiation of their empire in the midst of 1. extant celebrations and 2. the center of earth darkness (northern hemisphere).
Thus the season was hijacked. My impression is that early celebration of the new "Christmas" (year xxx) went along generally as before, regional celebrations based on local traditions, responding to the imposed rituals gradually or jarringly… after all, you cannot tell a man how to celebrate!
Or can you? Advent of electric entertainment cloaking corporate advertisement suddenly broadcast in all KINDS of instructions. Brands soothe, technology titillates. Products climb out of the glass face and populate our worlds. How we love our objects! It is only reasonable that, in a season given to communal reassurance, we share our feeling by giving beloved objects to people. This is the culture, and this is a fine thing. Santa, of course, approves – but Santa is dead now.
Santa has gone the way of Jupiter, hanging his great snowy face in the sky. He is a myth of a man, CEO among untermenschen, impossibly wealthy and apparently resourceful, even magical in his will to gift.
But Santa is dead now, going the way of the snow itself, and it falls upon our harried populace to tax their means and gift in the honor of Santa!
Santa-in-us agitates, mashes us up against each other. We are driven to co-mingle and dust off the old pagan traditions of Saturnalia: solstice awareness, disintegration of class, mischief and jolly-ness. For in the time of deepest night, the sought animal warmth of community omits any safety, except that which we respectfully incline towards each other.
That is a folk notion, and was the essential socialist idea (X) behind Christianity itself… but apparently, in latter days, this does not extend to folk beyond one's own cultural circle. In these times of post-globalization we must change the very practice of holiday celebration to participate in human community again.
In this way, we embrace the commonly extant holidays: Dark Solstice, Regal Chaunkkah, Pious Christmas, Righteous Kwanzaa & Crystal New Year. In that all impart gifts upon their celebrator, they are already practitioners of the Great Santanalia. And further – to the Muslims, the Atheists, the Hindis, the Satanist, the monks & acolytes – whose present body confers status in the Human Community.*
* Santa's rumored whiteness is based only on practical knowledge (North Pole exists in a tundra), but completely ignores the Hollow Earth theory, which has been discredited only by photographs. Santa could have been any kind of dude, really.
TAKE BACK THE HOLIDAYS
Santanalia is a three-week period beginning 21 days before the last day of Kwanzaa. Celebration styles vary widely, but invariably include social activity, preparation of objects & object exchange, and examination of the significant and daily occurrences of the preceding year. In the omnipresence of the night, it is potent time to participate in one's inner life. (Life changes might occur, but it is best not to force them.) It is from this interior practice that we generate the energy to fully celebrate, as well as prepare intentionally for the coming year.
RITES (in whatever order)
On the cusp of New Year, make a wish in the name of Santalia.
Gift-giving is most certainly NOT withheld for one particular day. The whole Holiday is ripe for receiving, and make certain to save some wrapped gift for January.
It is appropriate to overlap Santanalia with your traditional style of celebration. Santanalia is known soother for particular Holiday Hangover.
If commerce situations freak you out, it is totally acceptable to handcraft gift from the waste and excess of the past year.
Notice the birds and animals that actively scoutabout in this season. Give gifts to your favorite (they like simple food).
Give special thanks to an evergreen plant by decorating it while it is still in the ground. This includes cactus and other regional variance. There is also plenty of time to rescue cut trees from anxious Christmas-only households.
Santanalia lights are blues & indigoes.
Bend class rules at work holiday parties.
The importance of the Object was predominant to Santa, so shall it be to us. Use Santanalia as a time to revere all Objects – complex tools of perpetual use (home, vehicle, electronics) and simple Objects at hand; acknowledge them as people, ask how you can serve them.
Monday, December 08, 2008
Went to a film screening at St. Joe's on Sat. of Shelter: A Squatumentary. Hosted by Rochester Indymedia.
Here's this:
Here's this:
Friday, December 05, 2008
Monday, November 24, 2008
“It Could Have Worked” by Niels Colesky
When looking at aerial photographs of more than nine hundred bodies lying dead in the jungle, you have to feel disturbed. A walk along the elevated wooden walkways, with bodies either side of you, would leave you with a feeling that far transcends tragedy.
It matters not when you first “discover” Jim Jones, Peoples Temple and Jonestown, chances are your first thoughts are: “What sort of evil person is responsible for this?”
Surely the only thing that could have caused the snuffing out of nine hundred lives in the jungles of Guyana would be undiluted evil. We demand this of the universe. We can’t have mediocre people doing extreme things, be they good or be they bad. And we would need the cause of the Jonestown tragedy, this complete waste of human life and potential, to be pure evil.
And the people – the relatives of their loved ones who died, and the mere spectators of the event – had someone to pin the “Pure Evil” badge onto. Reverend Jim Jones was our scapegoat and probably forever will be. We can fill our hearts with hate for Jim Jones and we can dismiss his followers as flaky cultists. This is the easy path to follow. If we wish to follow this path, we must be sure to look straight ahead and focus only on the dead bodies, their leader at the top of the path choosing the coward’s way out with a bullet to the head. If we want to choose the easy way, the “laying of blame on only one reason” way, we must never ever look to the left or the right or indeed behind us. We must never ask why.
People willingly went to the jungle. They truly believed that Jim Jones could deliver a better life. Many man hours were spent building this community. One can only believe that somewhere in the beginning of it all, there was faith and there was hope. Why else would nearly one thousand people leave everything to go to the jungle? We have watched enough episodes of Survivor to know that your average city dweller does not have the means to make it in the wilderness. Yet aeroplane after aeroplane flew with members of Peoples Temple to Guyana to start life a-new. Were they drugged? Were they beaten until they got onto the aeroplanes? There were enough stories of abuse at the time for members of the Temple to know that Jim Jones was evil and demented. Weren’t there? But still, people climbed onto aeroplanes, to fly into the unknown.
I find it hard to believe that this man was all evil, and these people were all fools for following.
Jesus, it is said, told his disciples that he would make them fishers of men. Jim Jones undoubtedly was blessed with this talent. It is said that message of Peoples Temple reached approximately 20,000 heads.
If we look at old news and archive footage of both Peoples Temple and Jonestown, we see smiling faces. Lots of them. We see people who, at first anyway, were there by choice. There can be little doubt that by the morning of November 18, things in Jonestown were quite unbearable. Things must have been as bad as declared by Deborah Layton in her affidavit. In his article The Voice, Vern Gosney, tells us he was 119 pounds when he left Jonestown. The photographs we see of full plates of food? Publicity shots? Were they not, Vern Gosney would never have risked everything by passing the note to NBC newsman Don Harris.
In the end, Jonestown and Peoples Temple was a failure. A dismal failure that took too many lives with it. And yet, I have this nagging feeling that it could have worked. I have this unshakable feeling that it should have worked. Not only should Peoples Temple been a success, but it should have been a model for many more similar projects and communes.
From the early days of the Temple to the last day of Jonestown, what passed for a mission statement was printed on Peoples Temple letterhead. The mission statement is taken from Matthew 25, verses 35 to 40. If we believe mission statements, then we can believe that the people of Peoples Temple were committing to looking after those that could not look after themselves, be they hungry, unclothed, or sick. Peoples Temple was an organisation intent on looking after its old people; for getting the strayed out of trouble from the law; for helping people navigate the government bureaucracies of social services and welfare. Socialism in its purist, most unselfish way. Humanity does not get better than that.
The world right now is a confusing and scary place. The figures for poverty, starvation and hunger around the world today are staggering. It is estimated that approximately 820 million people are undernourished at the moment. While over the last ten years, the chronically homeless figures are on the decline, housing remains a major problem world wide. The aged are getting poorer and poorer.
We can speculate for the next 300 years why Jonestown failed, and some might even have what they consider definitive answers. But, for me, what I believe the most is that the world desperately needs for Jonestown-type settlements to exist and to work. How awesome would it be if there were organisations that would be prepared to pick those of us up that just don’t fit in. Offer us a feeling of community. Even better than that, a feeling of being part of a family.
Thirty years later, I believe that was what Peoples Temple was meant to be about.
And yet, it went wrong. We come up with ten thousand different reasons why it all went south. We blame drugs; we blame sex; we blame the Concerned Relatives, the CIA, the defectors. Mostly we blame Jim Jones.
The root cause for it all going wrong is simple. The whole problem is man and his ego. History is littered with men who thought they were bigger than the dream. For all his charm, magnetism and intelligence, Jim Jones was no different.
He grabbed the power that flowed so naturally from within and would never consider relinquishing it. And when he was no longer to stay in control, he took his entire tribe with him.
The Jonestown story could have been so much more different had someone strong enough just said “Stop.” By the time Christine Miller stood up and voiced her objections, it was too late. People were too tired and too hungry. And so went the dream of creating a little piece of paradise here on earth.
I sit here in my office in Cape Town, South Africa and in my mind’s eye I see the bodies. I hear the babies crying. I see the dead bodies shot up on the tarmac at Port Kaituma. I know it didn’t work and I can’t think of any action that would have stopped Jim Jones getting that far out of control. And yet the same words go through my mind over and over again.
It coulda worked. It shoulda worked.
When looking at aerial photographs of more than nine hundred bodies lying dead in the jungle, you have to feel disturbed. A walk along the elevated wooden walkways, with bodies either side of you, would leave you with a feeling that far transcends tragedy.
It matters not when you first “discover” Jim Jones, Peoples Temple and Jonestown, chances are your first thoughts are: “What sort of evil person is responsible for this?”
Surely the only thing that could have caused the snuffing out of nine hundred lives in the jungles of Guyana would be undiluted evil. We demand this of the universe. We can’t have mediocre people doing extreme things, be they good or be they bad. And we would need the cause of the Jonestown tragedy, this complete waste of human life and potential, to be pure evil.
And the people – the relatives of their loved ones who died, and the mere spectators of the event – had someone to pin the “Pure Evil” badge onto. Reverend Jim Jones was our scapegoat and probably forever will be. We can fill our hearts with hate for Jim Jones and we can dismiss his followers as flaky cultists. This is the easy path to follow. If we wish to follow this path, we must be sure to look straight ahead and focus only on the dead bodies, their leader at the top of the path choosing the coward’s way out with a bullet to the head. If we want to choose the easy way, the “laying of blame on only one reason” way, we must never ever look to the left or the right or indeed behind us. We must never ask why.
People willingly went to the jungle. They truly believed that Jim Jones could deliver a better life. Many man hours were spent building this community. One can only believe that somewhere in the beginning of it all, there was faith and there was hope. Why else would nearly one thousand people leave everything to go to the jungle? We have watched enough episodes of Survivor to know that your average city dweller does not have the means to make it in the wilderness. Yet aeroplane after aeroplane flew with members of Peoples Temple to Guyana to start life a-new. Were they drugged? Were they beaten until they got onto the aeroplanes? There were enough stories of abuse at the time for members of the Temple to know that Jim Jones was evil and demented. Weren’t there? But still, people climbed onto aeroplanes, to fly into the unknown.
I find it hard to believe that this man was all evil, and these people were all fools for following.
Jesus, it is said, told his disciples that he would make them fishers of men. Jim Jones undoubtedly was blessed with this talent. It is said that message of Peoples Temple reached approximately 20,000 heads.
If we look at old news and archive footage of both Peoples Temple and Jonestown, we see smiling faces. Lots of them. We see people who, at first anyway, were there by choice. There can be little doubt that by the morning of November 18, things in Jonestown were quite unbearable. Things must have been as bad as declared by Deborah Layton in her affidavit. In his article The Voice, Vern Gosney, tells us he was 119 pounds when he left Jonestown. The photographs we see of full plates of food? Publicity shots? Were they not, Vern Gosney would never have risked everything by passing the note to NBC newsman Don Harris.
In the end, Jonestown and Peoples Temple was a failure. A dismal failure that took too many lives with it. And yet, I have this nagging feeling that it could have worked. I have this unshakable feeling that it should have worked. Not only should Peoples Temple been a success, but it should have been a model for many more similar projects and communes.
From the early days of the Temple to the last day of Jonestown, what passed for a mission statement was printed on Peoples Temple letterhead. The mission statement is taken from Matthew 25, verses 35 to 40. If we believe mission statements, then we can believe that the people of Peoples Temple were committing to looking after those that could not look after themselves, be they hungry, unclothed, or sick. Peoples Temple was an organisation intent on looking after its old people; for getting the strayed out of trouble from the law; for helping people navigate the government bureaucracies of social services and welfare. Socialism in its purist, most unselfish way. Humanity does not get better than that.
The world right now is a confusing and scary place. The figures for poverty, starvation and hunger around the world today are staggering. It is estimated that approximately 820 million people are undernourished at the moment. While over the last ten years, the chronically homeless figures are on the decline, housing remains a major problem world wide. The aged are getting poorer and poorer.
We can speculate for the next 300 years why Jonestown failed, and some might even have what they consider definitive answers. But, for me, what I believe the most is that the world desperately needs for Jonestown-type settlements to exist and to work. How awesome would it be if there were organisations that would be prepared to pick those of us up that just don’t fit in. Offer us a feeling of community. Even better than that, a feeling of being part of a family.
Thirty years later, I believe that was what Peoples Temple was meant to be about.
And yet, it went wrong. We come up with ten thousand different reasons why it all went south. We blame drugs; we blame sex; we blame the Concerned Relatives, the CIA, the defectors. Mostly we blame Jim Jones.
The root cause for it all going wrong is simple. The whole problem is man and his ego. History is littered with men who thought they were bigger than the dream. For all his charm, magnetism and intelligence, Jim Jones was no different.
He grabbed the power that flowed so naturally from within and would never consider relinquishing it. And when he was no longer to stay in control, he took his entire tribe with him.
The Jonestown story could have been so much more different had someone strong enough just said “Stop.” By the time Christine Miller stood up and voiced her objections, it was too late. People were too tired and too hungry. And so went the dream of creating a little piece of paradise here on earth.
I sit here in my office in Cape Town, South Africa and in my mind’s eye I see the bodies. I hear the babies crying. I see the dead bodies shot up on the tarmac at Port Kaituma. I know it didn’t work and I can’t think of any action that would have stopped Jim Jones getting that far out of control. And yet the same words go through my mind over and over again.
It coulda worked. It shoulda worked.
Many people are hopeful about Barak Obama's presidency. I can understand why after 8 years of stupid wars, economic insecurity and the merger of state and evangelical church. However, as Ralph Nader said, will he be an Uncle Sam or an Uncle Tom? Time will tell, but I can't help being pessimistic. Obama is part of the same system that has run things for 300 years. He may be a fresh, young and (dare I say it) dark face, but politics is a club. Both Democrats and Republicans are part of this same club. President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and CFR member Tim Geithner will take over the job of administering the banker bailout in January. It appears Obama’s presumptive choice for AG will be Eric Holder, a former Clinton Justice Department official. As the corporate media throws confetti and heralds the possibility of America’s first black AG, it ignores something more sinister lurking beneath the surface: in 1999, Holder advocated internet regulation. read also: Barack Obama: the Banker’s Choice Thirty one out of forty seven people that he has named so far for transition or appointments have ties to the Clinton Administration, according to Politico. Obama’s transition team reviewing intelligence agencies and recommending appointments is headed by John Brennan and Jami Miscik, who worked under George Tenet when the CIA was involved in politicizing intelligence for, among other officials, Secretary of State Colin Powell’s erroneous address before the United Nations calling for war against Iraq. Mr. Brennan, as a government official, supported warrantless wiretapping and extraordinary rendition to torturing countries. National Public Radio reported that Obama’s reversal when he voted for the revised FISA this year relied on John Brennan’s advice. The top choice as White House chief of staff is Rahm Emanuel — the ultimate hard-nosed corporate Democrat, military-foreign policy hawk and Clinton White House promoter of corporate globalization, as in NAFTA and the World Trade Organization.