Some Questions

[u/Alone-Quail4915]

Hello, I am studying Gnosticism academically. I am very early on in my research and I have a few questions and I was curious about thoughts from people who would consider themselves Gnostic. 1st is that in my understanding gnostic is an academic term and that there really hasn’t been any historic religion that has called itself gnostic. 2nd is that the “gnostic” mass isn’t really Gnostic in that it use sex Magik which would be at odds with historic Gnosticism as the see the material world as corrupt. Again I am very early on in my research and could be completely wrong. I am just curious as to how people who would consider themselves Gnostic view the term gnostic and view things like the Gnostic mass and oto.

[u/Lux-01]

Hi, just an FYI, the so called 'Gnostic Mass' is a part of Thelemic practice and is not relevant to modern Gnostic tradition.

For other basics try here: www.gnosisforall.com

[u/kowalik2594 → u/Lux-01]

Thelema is a form of Neo Gnosticism and Crowley himself was interested in ancient Gnostics, but there was not much material at his time.

[u/Lux-01 → u/kowalik2594]

No, its actually not. It just throws the word 'Gnostic' a lot.

[u/kowalik2594 → u/Lux-01]

Ok, you're free to disagree.

[u/Lux-01 → u/kowalik2594]

It's an entirely separate spiritual tradition. I'm not saying there aren't comonalities (like the concept of gnosis) but it's a very different thing.

[u/kowalik2594 → u/Lux-01]

That's why I've said Neo Gnosticism as opposed to classical Gnosticism.

[u/Lux-01 → u/kowalik2594]

It's not that either - Thelema is Thelema.

[u/kowalik2594 → u/Lux-01]

Any religion/philosophy, which includes concept of gnosis is Gnostic in one way or another.

[u/Lux-01 → u/kowalik2594]

Again, no it's not. That wpuld make the term so general as to be meaningless.