Rainbow Mage

Will do, will do.

Yeah, Gnosticism isn't really discussed. Most religions aren't though, even Hinduism and Sikhism are rarely discussed here. Too much emphasis on bashing Christianity, Islam and Judaism that the rest of us feel left out.

Hopefully someone one will. If not, I will.

I totally understand your view on avatars and Jesus being one. As to avatars personally, I don't really believe in them as literal historic personages. If I did, I wouldn't know where I should draw the line. If I were to though, at a guess it'd probably be Vamana of Vaishnava philosophy. When it comes to Shaiva philosophy, it's a bit more confusing. Shakta even more so, because no avatars are really mentioned by name or anything like that.

I view an avatar as basically a God-realized person , not as God descended or anything.

i love your posts!!!!!

I need to frubal some others before I can frubal you again. Have some frubals in spirit.

Dude, there's nothing wrong with asking questions! I'm sorry if anything I said indicated that you shouldn't, or was otherwise unduly critical. Judaism is a religion of questions. Not being afraid to ask them is the first step in truly claiming your Jewish identity.

Not really, no. I mean the dualistic gnosticism that arose out of Zoroastrianism, for the most part. Although I believe Gershom Scholem argues that medieval Christian gnosticism influenced the composition of the Zohar to some degree, I would presume that such influence would be deeply secondary to the dualistic gnostic ideas of progressive spheres of enlightenment or wisdom or light, or of a dark and a light side to the universe, both of which are pre-Christian notions, drawn from ancient Babylonian mysticism and ancient Persian mysticism for the most part.

Thanks a lot

Aww shucks... thanks for the congratulatory message! Hope you have a great day yourself.

Hehe, I wouldn't think so. A person can be selfish but also respecting... if not then I am impossible

I practice as the spirit convicts me

Oh yeah, Hinduism still has its magic, and I don't think it's really fallen out of use too much, I think there are still quite a few people who believe it and may even use it.

Depending on the view, mantras, Tantra, and even God use magic--God's magic is maya---the illusion that separates. I don't like the translation of maya to "God's magic" though.

Then, of course, there are the siddhis.

Most importantly, there is even a whole Veda with magic in it: the Atharvaveda. I've not read it yet though, but I'll make sure to do so sometime.

I'm just someone who doesn't believe in magic, not that I'm not open to it being there. I don't think I ever say with certainty anything though, since I like to be open to changing my mind.

I cannot recall the title of the book that I read it in now-- it was some time ago-- but I recall reading about a certain initiation rite wherein the new Pharaoh, as part of his ascension to godhood, was the recipient of anal sex by the High Priest of Amon-Ra, the rite symbolically transferring the spirit of the god into the new Pharaoh. It seems I recall reading one or two other such practices also, but I confess I cannot bring them to mind on the spur of the moment. But I will certainly do more research.

Dude I would totally hang out with you.. The more I read of your posts the cooler you are!:grill:

i just want you to know that i prefer the name "sene" because of its radical coolness. therefore on the forums i shall still be calling you...... "sene"

I don't know but it really is silly to think that all kinds of people don't have their own motives, even secular issues.

For example I am heavily against carrying guns to the extent that some would say I violate the constitution.

Hinduism had a concept of everything being an illusion and Brahman being the Truth. In my opinion, which is radically different from current interpretations, Annatta denies the existence of the "ego self" and not the "Atman".

Don't we all come from the whole?

Let's just say you surprised and impressed me at the same time

scary avatar

No, I do not believe that it is necessary for all Buddhists to be atheists. Many, in fact most, Buddhists find the worship of their familial or cultural gods to be very important or worthwhile. It's just my own person decision to be an atheist. It's a common misconception that the Buddha taught atheism. He was not an atheist, he was more of a "non-theist". He never denied the existence the the Hindu deities, he just had a different interpretation on who and what they were, and on their characteristics.