- Joined
- Oct 13, 2025
- Messages
- 10
- Reaction score
- 19
"Truth did not come into the world naked, it came in types and images."
So goes the Gnostic Gospel of Philip.
We are told that we must "...Enter through the image".
One of the books I had issues finishing, nay, to deal with and wishing to relinquish from my psyche, was Outlines of Pyrrhonism by Sextus Empiricus. The very notion that our human constitution and it's faculties is not at all adequate to comprehend the nature of reality, that we always have an inborn limited perspective on matters, is something I find quite frightening - because it is, in essence, disempowering. I don't think I would be too far off in calling this sentiment a fundamentally Lovecraftian horror.
Traditions of yore tells us that the higher aspects of reality is something to be experienced and lived through; what the Neoplatonists called Intellectual-Intuition, what the Sufis considered their Wine - it goes by many names. At a certain point it seems that we must relinquish our rational cleverness, and experience that which expression pertains primarily to a symbolic dream-like logic. Hence the use of myth.
But alas, there are those who go into a movie and immerse themselves into the narrative; to such an extent, as Gustave Le Bon tells us in his Psychology of Crowds, that even the actors who played the villains in a play had to be escorted out backstage, lest they suffer the wrath of the crowd. The young man who played Geoffrey in Game of Thrones is a good modern example of this, and James Gandolfini remarked once in an interview that people off the street always called him Tony.
In the astrological writings of Vettius Valens, there is a peculiar mention of the planet Venus and her rulership; besides the usual sweet stuff we know her from today, he remarked that she made excellent Priests. I think the root of this idea can be found in the word "Faith", the Latin "Fidere", and it's negative manifestation "infidelity", where we eventually derive words such as "Confidence" from. In other words, Immersion.
I myself have no confidence in any one particular myth, just as a movie goer who cannot buy into the make-believe of the cinema, always dissecting it from a point a rational, Saturnian detachment, and I believe I greatly suffer from this in my praxis. I can of course suspend disbelief for a while and enjoy the spectacle. But I wish to remain there and unfold my roots, and this I cannot. I have no home so to speak; I envy the ancients who saw their thunder as Zeus.
In Matthew 11:28 it says: "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest".
And this is what I seek. But I cannot buy into any one narrative as the absolute, nor can I sell myself short into a complete negation of myth. Somewhere between these two poles exists a Golden Mean, but for now I cannot grasp it.
How do you guys deal with this stuff?
So goes the Gnostic Gospel of Philip.
We are told that we must "...Enter through the image".
One of the books I had issues finishing, nay, to deal with and wishing to relinquish from my psyche, was Outlines of Pyrrhonism by Sextus Empiricus. The very notion that our human constitution and it's faculties is not at all adequate to comprehend the nature of reality, that we always have an inborn limited perspective on matters, is something I find quite frightening - because it is, in essence, disempowering. I don't think I would be too far off in calling this sentiment a fundamentally Lovecraftian horror.
Traditions of yore tells us that the higher aspects of reality is something to be experienced and lived through; what the Neoplatonists called Intellectual-Intuition, what the Sufis considered their Wine - it goes by many names. At a certain point it seems that we must relinquish our rational cleverness, and experience that which expression pertains primarily to a symbolic dream-like logic. Hence the use of myth.
But alas, there are those who go into a movie and immerse themselves into the narrative; to such an extent, as Gustave Le Bon tells us in his Psychology of Crowds, that even the actors who played the villains in a play had to be escorted out backstage, lest they suffer the wrath of the crowd. The young man who played Geoffrey in Game of Thrones is a good modern example of this, and James Gandolfini remarked once in an interview that people off the street always called him Tony.
In the astrological writings of Vettius Valens, there is a peculiar mention of the planet Venus and her rulership; besides the usual sweet stuff we know her from today, he remarked that she made excellent Priests. I think the root of this idea can be found in the word "Faith", the Latin "Fidere", and it's negative manifestation "infidelity", where we eventually derive words such as "Confidence" from. In other words, Immersion.
I myself have no confidence in any one particular myth, just as a movie goer who cannot buy into the make-believe of the cinema, always dissecting it from a point a rational, Saturnian detachment, and I believe I greatly suffer from this in my praxis. I can of course suspend disbelief for a while and enjoy the spectacle. But I wish to remain there and unfold my roots, and this I cannot. I have no home so to speak; I envy the ancients who saw their thunder as Zeus.
In Matthew 11:28 it says: "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest".
And this is what I seek. But I cannot buy into any one narrative as the absolute, nor can I sell myself short into a complete negation of myth. Somewhere between these two poles exists a Golden Mean, but for now I cannot grasp it.
How do you guys deal with this stuff?