There are similarities in all the belief systems and philosophies, let's bring up what we know and connect with others in this thread
>I'm not christain lol I'm muslim
Where did I say that you are?
>you say you adhere to Shaktism?
More or less, I don't strictly adhere to any system but study lots of them and pick from them the things that resonate with me. But yes, Tantra and especially Vamachara Shakta influenced me the most.
>What is the creation story or explanation for why the universe exists according to that?
That's quite a long post. I'm gonna write it some other time, when I will have time for that, especially that Tantra and Shaktism aren't some uniform systems, they are basically umbrella terms hiding many different systems and sects. I'll do that most likely after I finish some mundane business and clean up my library. I will also post some resources in the /library/ if anyone is interested.
Also,
>researches the original Christianity
>haven't heard about the original Christian texts
>Did they mention the Nous, Logos, Demiurge, Sophia anything like that?
Yes. They are literally the source from which this stuff comes from.
Care to offer a criticism? Here are updated versions but I like the first version the most. Also added some pics that I like personally but will probably make you cringe even more
Um no it's the other way around. Christian gnosticism came from gnostics. The terms are greek, not hebrew or armaic. It all started with Plato and Socrates.
Damn I'm looking into it now and you're kind of right. The first bibles were written in greek by hellenistic jews (that's ridiculous). However hellenism did indeed originate from plato's academy.
Well actually looking deeper hellenism seems to be a sort of umbrella term for a number of greek philosophies and religions, so to really know what influenced christian gnosticism would require looking up exactly who these hellenistic jews were.
Regardless, although the term sophia nous and logos originated form just before platos time, demiurge definitely originated from him.
Anyways then you would know the parallels between the holy trinity and those concepts?
Nous:
The father/Creator/Source
Logos/Sophia:
The holy ghost, Christ Consciousness?
Demiurge:
Influence of Christ Consciousness?
Physical:
Jesus christ
At least that's what I figure. I'm going to have to look into the texts like what you have mentioned though feel free to share what you know.
I'm sure this relates to Judaism too, there's a lot of tetragrammaton concepts relating to the kabbalah. It probably relates to something in Islam too but I've yet to find anything
Also here's a randomly inserted paragraph while reading on the topic of Nous that I noticed, it could be of interest to you
"In Indian philosophy, a "higher mind" came to be considered to be a property of the cosmos as a whole. In Samkhya, the faculty of higher intellect (buddhi) is equated with the cosmic principle of differentiation of the world-soul (hiranyagarbha) from the formless and unmanifest brahman. This outer principle that is equated with buddhi is called mahat. The lower intellect is referred to as "manas"."
>Anyways then you would know the parallels between the holy trinity and those concepts?
Sadly, my mind was not really captivated by Christian Gnosticism, I studied it a bit and then I decided it's not really for me and I moved on to other regions of study.
I've heard of some other parallel:
Logos - soul
Sophia - mind
Demiurge - body
Logos was regarded as true creator who created our souls, Sophia gave us our minds and intellect and Demiurge created material world, thus entrapping us in this body.
I don't know if it's true or not, just something I've read somewhere.
>I'm going to have to look into the texts like what you have mentioned though feel free to share what you know.
Just don't be disappointed, I was when reading Nag Hammadi, but as I said - not really my cup of tea, maybe you will find it useful.
>In Indian philosophy, a "higher mind" came to be considered to be a property of the cosmos as a whole
In Tantra (and in Hinduism generally but I've only studied Tantra and a bit of Vedanta) whole universe is consciousness - Shiva as a passive element of creation, giving it a transcendental basis, while Shakti as active - matter, power, qualities of everything etc. The human soul when is bounded by karma to given body is called Jiva and when a person reaches enlightenment it's called Atman and is equal to Shiva, something like a return to the All in Hermeticism.
>The lower intellect is referred to as "manas"
Manas is also one of the higher tattvas (elements). It shows a unique approach to macro and microcosm, because Manas is essentially the gate of sense perceptions in an individual. As a macrocosmic tattva, from it emerge 5 lower tattvas, namely Akasha (spirit), from Akasha comes Vayu (air), from it Tejas (fire), and so forth - Apas (water) and Prithvi (earth). What it means is that all perceivable world, consisting of 5 gross tattvas, exist within the mind of the individual, as it was raised from their sense perceptions. It makes sense as we can't ever prove that anything exists "objectively" as we can only judge it's existence from our sense perceptions, so in a way the whole universe is created inside of us.
Pic unrelated, but I thought that it fits nicely.
Seeker 2016-08-31 23:17:51 No.6435
Ah I heard about that how the founder apparently went into a forest to meditate and disappeared for a few days and came back with knowledge or something. He probably went astral projecting!
Seeker 2016-09-01 01:00:57 No.6440
>Logos was regarded as true creator who created our souls, Sophia gave us our minds and intellect and Demiurge created material world, thus entrapping us in this body.
That actually matches, you are saying what the creator is so how it matches would make the creator one level up.
Sophia, spirit of the universe
created mind (of humanity)
Logos, mind of the universe
created soul (of humanity)
Demiurge, soul of the universe
created body (of humanity)
Sophia -> Logos -> Demiurge -> Physicality
I would read the Christian texts as supplemental knowledge, am already quite pleased with what Montalk says and general reading of Neoplatonism through the internet.
Manas sounds like the third eye and the other tattvas sound like charkas, or types of energies.
>It makes sense as we can't ever prove that anything exists "objectively" as we can only judge it's existence from our sense perceptions, so in a way the whole universe is created inside of us.
Yes this is true, but if you want to talk about objectivity we have to delve into philosophy. This is very similar to cogito ergo sum. There is me (or something allowing me to exist) and then there is everything else. Only these two things can really be proven to exist, and in fact even those two things might actually be the same one thing. Of course philosophy proves that nothing can be provable to exist objectively, so what is objectivity in philosophy? It is patterns, consistency. Reality might as well be a dream but what sets it apart is the consistency. This pattern identifying created math and thus the cause and effect doctrine of science.
Anyways, every religion has their own way of explaining this 'consistency' and although the universe might as well be created inside of us, we can't control it anyways so that point doesn't matter much
>Care to offer a criticism?
It's obviously made by idiots who believe Out Of Africa nonsense.
Animism is not the mother religion it was developed by humans.
The source, logos, was given to us by aliens.
>ayy lmao space aliens
No they are aliens but not from space
>HOL UP MUH SCIENCE GOY
how dare you demean humanity by denying their intellect? The terms of nous logos etc were inveted by greek philosophers. They independently came up with the philosophies and logic of what is true through thought experiments. They used their mind, try it sometime.
While this thread is still short I'll post this most interesting article
http://www.philosophyforlife.org/exploring-the-multiverse-of-spiritual-pluralism/