0143 How do these Gnostic models compare to Christianity?

Can I produce a model for Christianity similar to the working model of the Gnostic origin story?

The model should defy Gnostic formulations.  Otherwise, Gnostic infiltrates in the church would not be called “choices”.

0144 Here is how I would replace elements of the Gnostic origin myth with Christian terms.

One God would go into the slot for the pleroma_3c.  The emanations of the pleroma become creative acts by the one God.

The Holy Spirit would replace Personified Wisdom_2c.  The Holy Spirit, like Sophia, may be treated as a Person.

The truth would go into the slot for the Monad_1c.

0145 In a previous example, the image of a world where friends do not lie to friends belonged to the Monad.

Of course, the Gnostic image is not Real.  The Christian truth entertains a similar, but drastically more realistic, version.  It is the image of a world where the truth of the friend’s lie is revealed.

Obviously, I cannot spiritually migrate to this world.  This is a world where the One God_3c contextualizes truth_1c.  This is the world created by the One True God_3c.

0146 Rationality accessible to humans as (fallen) images of God substitutes for mindless rationality_3b.

Yahweh goes into Yaltabaoth’s slot.

However, Yahweh is not Yaltabaoth.  Yaltabaoth operates under a regime of mindless rationality.  Yahweh is much more clever.  Read the Bible to see.

0147 God’s active will goes into the slot of the potential determining my form_1b.  I would not be here without God’s active will.

0148 The sacraments instituted by the Christian church replaces the superego_3a.

0149 In this regard, Burfeind reports an interesting observation in the political sciences.

Voting patterns between liturgical and pietist Christian traditions differ.

0150 How do these traditions differ?

The liturgical traditions regard the sacraments as sacred.  Pietist traditions do not.  The pietist view the sacraments as symbols.

For the liturgical traditions, the sacraments constitute the normal context of ritual activity.  In this, they serve like a superego (a repository of rules and aphorisms).

For the pietist traditions, the gathering calls the Holy Spirit.  In the normal context of the Holy Spirit’s movement, the bread and wine are served as symbols of Christ.

These two traditions re-enact the different normal contexts_3a contending for the ego_2a and id^real_2a.

0151 Here are the different voting patterns:

Liturgical traditions tend to vote to reduce centralization of political power.

Pietist traditions tend to vote to increase centralized political power.

Voting to increase central power is a marker for Gnostic values.  This marker seems reasonable.  Self-anointed Gnostic elites tend to congregate in institutional positions where livelihood is guaranteed, such as government bureaucracies.

0152 The sacramental habituation_3a (a super-ego_3a, so to speak) of the liturgical traditions seems to resist temptations to elevate the Self into the normal context of the personal level.  The pietist traditions do not have this habituation.

If the sacraments replace the superego_3a, then the person_2a becomes the union of ego_2a and Self_2a.

0153 If I experience myself as a person (rather than a Self), then my person would correspond to the encountered being in Suarez’s model.

Jesus would correspond to the accounting being_2a.

The dyad in actuality_2a becomes Jesus and my person.  The contiguity between the two fits the old medieval depiction of the relation between grace (as actual) and nature (as actual): Grace inflows nature.

So the personal-level dyad would be rendered as Jesus (redeems, graces, inspires…) person_2a.

0154 Finally, the potential of God’s passive will replaces the id^fantasy_1a.  God’s passive will underlies the actuality of Jesus [feeds] person_2a.

Thus, God’s passive will turns my life into a theodrama.

0155 The resulting model is strikingly different from the Gnostic origin myth, even though I merely substituted Christian terms for Gnostic elements.

0156 Plus, the situation-level nested form is no longer evil.

Is that not odd?

0157 Another oddity is how the Holy Spirit and the sacraments are not in opposition.

The virtual nested form in actuality goes like this: 

The person_2a experiences baptism_1a and is drawn into a sacramental life_3a, where Jesus [blesses, instructs, inspires…] the person_2a. The sacraments_3a draw the person_2a into contiguity with Christ_2a.  The Father_2b virtually situates the person in the accounting of Christ_2a.  The Holy Spirit_2c virtually brings the Father_2b into relation to the person in contiguity with Christ_2a. The Father_2b and the Son_2a reveal the Holy Spirit_2c.

0158 Of course, this is not the only relational model of Christian concepts.

However, it raises disturbing questions.

Why would Christian terms fit so convincingly into the model for the Gnostic origin myth?

Plus, why would the placements so directly refute the Gnostic origin myth?

0159 At the same time, I can also see the potential of subversion.

Gnosticism is an opportunistic religion.

0160 In chapter 3, Burfeind relates this story:

Around 1100AD, once Christianity was established to the West and Islam to the East, political consolidation gave the Gnostic myth an opportunity.  Each religion became the Establishment.  Gnostic heresies appeared.  To the West, they were the Cathars.  To the East, they were the Sufis.  Both Cathars and Sufis wrote poetry, celebrated God using metaphors of erotic love, and drank a lot.  The Establishments of the West and East tried to suppress these movements.

0162 In chapter 4, Burfeind brings the story to modern times.  In the next section, I comment on the sequence.

0163 What about the troubadours?  What about modern Cultural Studies?

Troubadours sang of courtly love.  The knight was in love with the Lady of the Big House.

The love was not consummated, at least not according to the songs, because that would violate the repressive norms of the tribal… er, feudal tradition, as well as the church.  So the knight pledged to defend the honor of the Lady.  The Lady, in turn, silently pined for the knight.  She carried a small token of him everywhere she went.

0164 Oh, I can hear the mournful lyrics of unrequited love!

0165 The knight is torn between his ego and his Self.

His ego is the part of him that swore fealty to the Lord of the Big House.  The knight’s ego has to work to keep order for the Lord.  He has to break up the occasional peasant brawls.  He has to fight bandits.  The peasants, of course, admire him for this.  He is the only one who actually does stuff for them.

His Self is the part of him that resonates with the troubadour’s song.  Sophia has a word for him.  That word is “honor”.  He loves the Lady of the Big House.  He yearns to defend her honor.

0166 Of course, the conflict may resolve in a tragic fashion.  The Gnostic message may give way to the elitist model.  The knight’s Self may take charge.  He may look down on the Lord of the Big House as a stooge of royal traditions.

0167 Here is the elitist model of this troubadour’s tale:

0168 There is comedy in this image.

The knight as an immaterial Self is funny.  The fellow has a horse, armor, and sword.  He knocks the heads of peasants.  He mortally wounds bandits.  Yet, he defines his person as the Lady’s unrequited love.  Actually, he defines himself in quiet opposition to the Lord of the Big House.

0169 Is that goofy?

0170 The knight as Self mimics the immaterial world contextualizing the material world, just as the honor of the Lady of the Big House puts the laws and traditions of feudal society into perspective.

0171 Yet, the knight as Self also puts the Lord of the Big House into a normal context.  The Lord of the Big House is no longer a human.  He is a thing, expressing material concerns.  He is a shell of evil matter.  The Lord of the Big House is merely the puppet of the conditions that he was born into.  He is a slave to the feudal world’s reality principles.

0172 Even though all the characters in the troubadour’s musical drama are nominally Christian, the Gnostic infiltration affects more than the church.  It penetrates the economic and military power structures in feudal society.  Since feudal society subsists on loyalty oaths, any knight who adopted Gnosticism would be dangerous to his duke or lord.

0173 Here is a story that ended up as a troubadour’s song:

A duke returns from a long and treacherous journey, doing the bidding of the king.  The lady of the big house offers him a cup, a poisoned chalice.  With one sip, the duke slumps on his throne.  The duchess cries for help.  Who arrives first, but the dedicated knight?

0174 The troubadour sings, “The king’s work was too much. The duke fell from the overwhelming burdens of this evil and material world. The knight claimed his soul mate and they flew to a spiritual union.”

0175 If I were the duke’s cousin, ruling a neighboring fiefdom, what would I think upon hearing the troubadour’s song?  My cousin was a person, not some puppet of his royal conditioning.  He was in fine health.  The king’s duties did not kill him.

0176 Once the Self_3a puts the superego [causes] the ego(id^real)_2a into the box of actuality and projects that immanent causality onto others, then the Self_3a has no constraints_1b.  Natural laws and traditional social norms_2b are no longer relevant.

This is the logic behind Burfeind’s observation that Gnostic theory never applies to the theoretician.

The damned actuality_2a of the elite Self_3a has been packaged and sent to the Other_2b.

The Self_3a is now contextualized by Sophia_2c, personified by the Lady of the Big House.

0177 Now, consider today’s Cultural Studies.  Here is a typical presentation:

The behaviors of subject A are determined by social tradition A’.  The (super-ego related) A’ causes the (ego-related) material concerns of A, explaining why objections to (the Self-promoting) policy B are merely artifacts of now-rejected cultural conditioning.

0177 How does this match the troubadour’s song?

The Cultural Studies person replaces the knight as a Gnostic elite_3a.

A fantasy-rich organizational objective, policy B, replaces the unattainable Lady of the Big House_2c.  

Policy B puts the natural laws and pre-“scientific” social norms_2b of subject A_2a into perspective.

The concerns and behaviors of subject A go into the slot formerly reserved for the Lord of the Big House_2a.

Indeed, subject A_2a has no idea what is going to happen to him on the basis of Policy B.  Neither did the Lord of the Big House once the knight and his lady became Self-actualized.

Folk theories based on the reality principle replace id^real.

Gnostic scientific theories replace id^fantasy.

0178 Finally, coming together through purely cultural accounts replaces the spiritual union of lover and beloved_1c. 

Cultural studies propose that biological differences are irrelevant compared to cultural conditioning. This happens to be true in the case of race. But, race is the rare exception. 

Therefore, all cultural conditioning compares to racism.

0179 (Needless to say, no faction of Christianity has ever declared belonging to a race to be sinful.  This is discussed in a Primer on An Infrasovereign Religion, number 8 in the series.  Biology is not a moral decision.  Biology sets the stage for moral decisions.)

0180 The resulting model looks like this:

0181 So, let me say this plainly.

When a cultural studies agent (whether in academics or on television) states that opposition to policy B is due to racism, this is a code for a projection of ‘the damned ego-actuality of the accuser’ onto ‘those who operate according to the reality principle’.

The elite Gnostic is really posturing, “I am not like the ones I accuse. Plus, I cannot defend policy B on grounds of the reality principle.  In fact, my support of policy B is a signal that I am above the reality principle.  I am an expert compared to the dunces who oppose policy B.”

0182 I now turn to science and the Gnostic origin myth.

The associations are clear.  The contiguity between superego and ego(id^real) is not scientific causality.  Superego [causes] ego_2a is an artifact of the elite version of the Gnostic origin myth.

This content-level actuality is a symptom of the exclusion of the superego by the Sophia-promoted Self.  Expertise in state-funded cultural studies and on American television expresses the meaning underlying the word “religion”.

This expertise is a social construction, labeling itself “social science”.

The experts have secret knowledge that they verify through surveys and dramatic examples.

0183 This raises a question: Where does actual science enter into the picture?

If science has anything to do with this madness, then where would it fit?

0184 I begin my discussion of this topic with a comparison of the elements of thirdness among three models: (1) the Gnostic origin myth, (2) Suarez’s interscope on mind-dependent being and (3) the current (8816 U0’) biological sciences.

The normal contexts for the biological sciences are not final.  I simply choose topics that seem to correspond to the other two.

0185 What is my first impression?

In the Gnostic myth, mindless rationality_3b characterizes any particular aeon_3c and virtually defines the superego_3a.  Ironically, mindless rationality_3b is not aware that its horizons are limited to its particular age_3c.

Similarly, reflexive reason_3b typically does not evoke reflective reason_3c.  Reflexive reason_3b should solve any situation.  Reflective reason_3c may adjust one’s take on ‘what is happening’_3a after reflexive reason_3b runs into problems.

Similarly, Darwinian selection_3b reinforces stasis during an evolutionary period_3c.  The same drama of staying alive_3ais played over and over for millions of years.  When Darwinian selection_3b alters, then this stability_3c disappears and new tactics for survival_3a appear.

0186 The comparison makes me wonder: What is the pleroma_3c?  Is it emanations of male and female pairs representing aeons of mindless reason_3b?  Or is the pleroma_3c the wheel drawing the elite Self_3a into the turning of an age?  Does the actuality of Sophia_2c denote the one becoming the other?

In other words, does the pleroma come into play when the mindless rationality of the current aeon fails?

It must be, since reflective reason comes into play when reflexive reason becomes confounded.  In the same way, an evolutionary period ends when Darwinian selection significantly changes.

0187 Is the Gnostic origin myth a fairy tale about something catastrophic in the nature of the other two topics?

Did some event in our past both destroy the reflexive reason characteristic of the Lebenswelt that we evolved in and, at the same time, significantly change the reproductive success of humans?

0188 On top of that, did this catastrophic alteration in the human Lebenswelt produce the division of the person into material and immaterial aspects, the ego and the Self?

Whoa. What a nightmare.

0189 Consider the person.

The superego_3a is the normal context in which the ego_2a takes responsibility for the Self_2a.  When the Self_3a becomes the normal context, the person becomes a husk of social conditioning (superego) causing material concerns (ego & id^real).

A distortion of the person along the axis of material and immaterial opens the door to both permutations.

The superego_3a and the Self_3a are normal contexts that belong to our current Lebenswelt.

I doubt whether they belong to the Lebenswelt that we (humans) evolved in.

0190 Consider our cosmos.

The eternal cycles of the pleroma became immanent.

The unfolding of the aeons came down to Earth at some point in human prehistory.  It came down as a huge mistake by Sophia.  It describes the cloud where Yaltabaoth resides.  Yaltabaoth begins as a lion and ends as a snake.

The Gnostic origin myth captures a radical separation between reflective and reflexive reason as a loss of the Lebenswelt_3a that we evolved in.

0191 The Gnostic fairy tale contains two origin myths.  Each addresses a catastrophic division within our world and our person.

0192 The next question that arises is this: 

Can anthropology propose a prehistoric event that accounts for these coordinated fairy tales?

0193 Does the Gnostic founding touch base with the First Singularity?

Here is another origin story.  It is a scientific hypothesis.  It depicts a break in human evolution.  It accounts for why our current Lebenswelt is not the Lebenswelt that we evolved in.  The name of the break is “the first singularity”.

0194 In the beginning, the Homo genus practiced hand talk.  During the long history of our genus, our ancestors explored the adaptive cognitive spaces available to hand talk.  One of these cognitive spaces was language.

Language consists of purely symbolic operations.  Originally, it relied on the symbolic character of hand talk.  Hand-talk words are distinct and finite in number.  Therefore, they may form a symbolic order capable of supporting operations.  We call these symbolic operations, “grammar”.

0195 The evolution of language exploited the symbolic sign qualities of hand talk.  But, it did not alter its foundational referential character.  Manual-brachial word-gestures retained their imagistic (iconic) and indicative (indexal) sign qualities.  Hand-talk words pictured and pointed to things and states of things, even when the referents were no longer present.

0196 Fully linguistic hand talk lasted for millions of years. It was a successful adaptation.

0197 Bands congregated into tribes.  Occasional, seasonal and brief tribal gatherings favored synchronization.  Singing was one of the many cultural adaptations.  Vocal synchronization selected for greater voluntary neural control of the voice.  Our ancestors became more and more adept at singing.

0198 At that point, our species, Homo sapiens, exapted the voice from singing for speech.  Speech was added to hand talk.

For tens of thousands of years, Homo sapiens practiced hand-speech talk.  Our species settled every continent but one.  They enjoyed the referentiality of hand talk.  They began to explore the adaptive cognitive spaces opened by speech talk.

0199 Speech talk is purely symbolic, so I am not surprised that our species increasingly tried to represent symbols through art.

0200 Art is manufactured.  The artistic artifact displays a symbolic dimension.  In doing so, art endows pure symbols with the sign-qualities of hand talk.

Paleolithic art demonstrates the principle.  Humans began to realize that their hand-talk words represented more than things and states of things.  Symbolic qualities of hand-speech talk could be validated by the construction of artifacts. The semiotic qualities of speech could turn tools into art objects.

0201 The addition of speech to hand talk opened the door to artistic representation on a scale never exhibited before.  Speech talk is purely symbolic.  Hand talk is iconic and indexal, in addition to being symbolic.  Paleolithic and Neolithic art appears to capitalize on the referential qualities of hand talk and the symbolic qualities of speech talk.

0202 Now, for a thought experiment based on Suarez’s model of ens rationis.

I am a Paleolithic ancestor.  I encounter a (mind-independent) being.  My efficient intellect projects a (mind-dependent) being that accounts for the encountered being.  The dyad in content-level actuality_2a is complete.

0203 If I were to state, in hand talk, what I was thinking, then I would gesture the words that imaged or pointed to the encountered being.  My gestural-words would reproduce the encountered being.

0204 If I were to state, in speech talk, what I was thinking, then I might explicitly abstract a feature of my judgment, rather than present an iconic and indexal re-enactment.  When this is done, the spoken word causes the efficient intellect to place a label in the position of accounting being.

0205 Ironically, the label is only a placeholder in a system of differences. It alludes to the encountered being only as an element within a symbolic order.  However, I may actualize the label by constructing an artifact.  The artifact becomes a real being that I can encounter.

Once I encounter this mind-independent man-made artifact, I actualize the mind-dependent symbolic element.

0206 Paleolithic portable art has this character.  The portable itself reflects explicit abstraction.  One element of an entire symbolic order is presented.  The imagery and indications of the portable, however, reflect implicit abstraction. The entire symbolic order dwells within the iconicity and indexality of the portable itself.

Thus, I may speak to the portable, as if it would reply in hand talk.

0207 Paleolithic and Neolithic art exploit this cognitive space opened by speech talk and demonstrate that speech altered our evolved grounding in hand talk.  Reference gained a symbolic dimension.

0208 Then, the first singularity happened.

The first singularity was a cultural transition that started when one Developed Neolithic culture dropped its hand talk.  In other words, it adopted speech-alone talk.  This cultural transition then spread to the rest of the world through mimesis.

0209 Imitation?  Why would hand-speech talking cultures imitate speech-alone talking cultures?

Speech-alone talk potentiated unconstrained complexity.

As this one culture advanced through labor and social specialization, other cultures observed the developments.  In order to copy the wealth and prestige of the speech-alone talking culture, they abandoned hand talk.

0210 How does this work?

Speech-alone talk represents the world differently than hand-speech talk.  Speech-alone talk is purely symbolic.  All spoken works are placeholders in symbolic orders.  As such, relations and qualities, such as the word “wisdom”, may be labeled.

0211 “Wisdom” could not be labeled in hand-speech talk.  Wisdom is not a thing or a state of things.  One cannot image or point to “wisdom” using a manual-brachial gesture.  So, the image and indication of “wisdom” had to be encoded holistically through reference to a thing or state of things.  Perhaps, this thing was a person.  Sophia?

0212 With speech-alone talk, “wisdom” differs from “the builder gods”.  Yet, both belong to the same system of differences.

0213 Here is a practical example.

Wheels do not occur in nature.  There was no hand talk word for “wheel”.  However, there is circular motion.  Circular motion is used to throw pottery.  Indeed, circular motion may have been a word-gesture for “pottery”.

0214 The pottery wheel is one of the early inventions of civilization. The pottery wheel explicitly abstracts circular motion from other aspects of throwing pottery.  Following the character of speech-alone talk, circular motion became an element in a system of differences in regards to throwing pottery.  Then, circular motion was assigned to the potter’s wheel, rather than the hands.  The potter’s wheel became the artifact that made real the speech-alone word assigned to circular motion in pottery manufacture.

0215 This practical example suggests why speech-alone talk favors unconstrained complexity.  Unconstrained complexity produces wealth (from labor and material specialization) and power (from social specialization).  No wonder it spread like a contagion.

0216 So, how did the first singularity get started?

The Ubaid of southern Mesopotamia was the first culture to drop its hand talk.  Earliest indications of the culture date to a few centuries after 6800BC.  I call this time point: 0 Ubaid Zero Prime (or 0 U0’ or “Zero Uh-oh Prime”).  From the point of view of the Lebenswelt that we evolved in, this date represents the big uh-oh.

Around 2300 U0’, the Ubaid suddenly expanded into northern Mesopotamia, colonizing key sites along the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers and along budding trade routes.  This type of cultural event never happened before.  The Ubaid exhibited unconstrained complexity.  They went on to form Uruk town-chiefdoms.  The Uruk period grew into the Sumerian Dynastic city-states.

0217 To me, this implies that 23 centuries (or around 100 generations) of trial and error mark the transition from the start of the Ubaid to the Uruk.  These generations made the transition from the Lebenswelt of hand-speech talk to the Lebenswelt of speech-alone talk.

0218 I can imagine that the personal origin myth is a fairy tale about this period.

This transition locates the division of the person into the ego and the Self along the axis of material and immaterial.  My Self is what I evolved to be.  My ego is my persistent attempts to cope with and flourish in the social structures of the Lebenswelt of speech-alone talk.

0219 Material concerns go with the artifact-filled world of the ego.  Id^real responds to the symbols of the social world as if they were actual.  The superego is the normal context of that response. The superego is the repository of meanings, presences and messages for speech-alone symbols, among other things.

Immateriality goes with the Self.  The ego acts in the Name of the Self.  How long does it take for the Self to realize that it has a name?  The Self encounters the world as if the world was talking in gestures.  The Self asks itself, “What do I like?  What do I not like?”  The Self is open to suggestions.

0220 After one hundred generations, the timeless gods of the Lebenswelt that we evolved in were betrayed, buried and forgotten.

The builder gods inhabited a new – situation-level – horizon.  Humans began to call on the name of the builder god.  That is all they knew.  The spiritual and establishment levels were glued together.  Kings and priests naively ruled the town-chiefdoms of the Uruk in the name of the builder gods.

Mesopotamian city-states followed the Uruk archaeological period.  The builder gods constructed a civilization.  Each political-religious structure was stable for hundreds of years.  Gods did not fall when a city-state fell.  They were integrated into a new builder god mythology.

0221 I claim that the origin myths of the ancient Sumerian civilization, as well as the origin myths in the Bible, are fairy tales about those twenty-three centuries.  For the Gnostic origin myth, I see the personal origin myth as corresponding to this period of confusion.

0222 Perhaps, one irony of my particular model comes from the fact that terms from modern psychoanalysis are used to fill in several slots. Does Modernism repeat, as farce, the tragedy of those 23 centuries? 

The farce, of course, is that the Self becomes a little Sophia. We anoint ourselves as the bearers of a new age.  We hide our aborted monsters in the clouds. Then, each monster in the cloud takes on a life of its own.

0223 For the Gnostic cosmic origin myth, I look to the east of the great and ancient civilization in the Tigris and Euphrates River valley.  I look to the west of the precocious and ancient civilization that formed in the Indus River valley.  I look to the Iranian highlands.

0224 What once was called “Persia” consists of small river valleys, connected in ways that discourage the formation of a large single political-religious civilization.

Once speech-alone talk was adopted, one civilization would rise in one valley and another civilization would rise in another.  Each would command the resources and organize the people.  Each would succeed for a while.  Each would fail from internal dissension or external invasion.

0225 The builder gods would rise, recruit sovereign and religious power, and construct artifacts demonstrating the actuality of their symbols.  Then, they fell for lack of decisiveness or resources.  The turnover was relentless.

0226 I find it easy to imagine a figure slowly entering consciousness, over the generations.  Establishment-level builder gods came and went, but this figure remained on the spiritual level.  Eventually, this figure was associated to Sophia, Personified Wisdom, in the current version of the Gnostic origin myth.

Sophia lives while Yaltabaoth dies over and over again.

0227 Look at the image of Yaltabaoth.  The first half is lion.  The second half is snake.  The image depicts Yaltabaoth in time… in like a lion, out like a snake.

0228 The pleroma is not what it appears to be.

The pleroma is more than an image of a sequence of emanations of male and female pairs from the Monad, disrupted by the behavior of Sophia.  The pleroma is multiple and sequential emanations of Yaltabaoth, first as lion, then becoming snake, then uniting with Sophia as a single age as each civilization ends.

0229 In the Gnostic origin myth, Sophia seems to be making a mistake.  Perhaps, she is not.  She plays the role of continuity in a repetition disorder.

Sophia calls the individual in community to find a way back to the Source.  She provides the individual with a path to do so.

Sophia may sap strength from the lion of Yaltabaoth.  She may lessen the benefits of the good times.  But, she also quickens the death of the snake of Yaltabaoth.  She lessens the losses of the bad times.

0230 If Yaltabaoth commands the material world and all its concerns, then Yaltabaoth will be mortal.  If Sophia dwells above Yaltabaoth in the spiritual world, then Personified Wisdom is immortal.  The pleroma is the graveyard of her world-creating children.  The Monad is her incubation of the world to come.

0231 Every religious social construction creates a charism, a counter-intuitive cognitive space that fosters human flourishing. It creates an opportunity for coming together to construct a world. However, the actualization of the cognitive space also opens an opportunity for social collapse, as the religious social construction fails to survive internal dissent or external threat.  This pattern fits the concept of a builder god.

0232 The original formulations of the Gnostic origin myths rendered the consequences of the first singularity as two interrelated fairy tales, one cosmic and the other personal.  The formulations match the conditions of the Iranian plateau, making this area unique in the world.

0233 The Gnostic family of myths broke out from its birthplace when the great river valley civilizations fell.

To the east, the Harappan civilization collapsed during the migration of proto-Indo-European speaking tribes from the north.  The same migration settled the Iranian plateau through elite dominance.  The original Gnostic myths were adopted and transformed.

To the west, the Sumerian civilization finally disappeared in the coming of the Akkadian empires.  The last gasp of the Sumerian polity was Ur III.

Ur III spoke Sumerian, unrelated to any family of languages.  The Akkadians spoke a Semitic language.

0234 This may have been the time when the mythic Abraham lived.  The ziggurat is a Sumerian invention.  After Ur III, the Sumerian language was expressed only in rituals and writing.  The building of a ziggurat is linked to the confounding of tongues in the Biblical story of the tower of Babel.  The Genesis text mentions Abraham right after this story.

0235 The Gnostic origin myth portrayed by Burfeind is a testament to the first singularity.

0236 Part 3 of Burfeind’s book, titled Utopian Pursuits, permits a formulation of the presence underlying the word “Gnosticism”.

Students are to read chapters 8, 9 and 10 of Burfeind’s text.

0237 How to Define the Word “Religion” proposes two types of religion.  These are suprasovereign and infrasovereign.  Here is the interscope of the society tier:

0238 Infrasovereign religions stand below sovereign power.  They express organizational objectives and are defined by a capacity to grasp for sovereign power.

0239 Christianity provides a good example

Jesus said, “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.”  This implies the believer should distinguish between religious and sovereign institutions.  Plus, religious institutions should not seek sovereign power in the Name of Christ.

However, over and over again in Western history, Christian factions seized sovereign power in the Name of God. The temptation to seek sovereign power is great. Sovereign power allows an (infra)sovereign religion to impose its interpretation of scriptures.

0240 Many Christian institutions explicitly vow not to seek sovereign power.  This demonstrates that they are capable of doing so and are consciously aware of that capacity.

Many post-religious (so-called Enlightenment) institutions claim that they are not religious.  Yet, they seek sovereign power in order to achieve their organizational objectives.  Thus, they meet the criteria defining an infrasovereign religion.

0241 A suprasovereign religion stands above sovereign power. It expresses the object that brings all into relation. It does not grasp for sovereign power. Rather, it puts sovereign power into perspective.

0242 The Gnostic origin myth can be formatted as a relational object.  This object^relation appears as the actuality on the perspective level of the society tier.

0243 Since actuality is dyadic, the object^relation may be represented as two elements, a theological nested form and an anthropological nested form. (This is portrayed for Christianity’s formulation of the individual around 800AD in an interlude in How to Define the Word “Religion”.)

0244 Here is the Gnostic origin myth as relational object_2c in the interscope of the society tier_C.

0245 A comparison of the relational objects of Christianity and Gnosticism suggests that the individual (the whole person) in Christianity is divided into the ego (site of material concerns) and the Self (site of immaterial experiences) in Gnosticism.

0246 A comparison also suggests a parallel between Jesus, the Christ, and Yaltabaoth.  Actually, the Father and the Sonmight be a better correspondence.  Hmmm.  Maybe, Yahweh should match Yaltabaoth and Jesus should stand in for me.  That would make the Holy Spirit match Sophia.

0247 If that sounds like dream talk, then I am making myself clear.

Gnosticism works by creatively fusing Christian and Gnostic relational objects.  The sacraments are replaced by secret knowledge. My individual person becomes divided into ego and Self.  My Self is the same as Jesus. My Self-Jesus may now escape Yahweh’s material-oriented cage.

0248 Burfeind correlates this fusion to neo-Evangelicals in Part 4 of his book.

0249 Gnosticism has always been an opportunistic religion.

It co-opts elements within any object (whether infrasovereign or suprasovereign) and places them into its own mythic framework.

0250 Progressivism is Gnosticism penetrating the American political system under the guise of a Union god.

What is this Union god?

Abraham Lincoln, sadly enough, spoke the slogan: A government (Union god) of the people, by the people, and for the people.

All I have to do is replace the word “people” by the word “philosophers”.  Philosophy is Greek for the love of Sophia.

Or better, erase the word “people” and write in “Gnostic elites”.

0251 Yes, the Union God becomes Sophia. The original American arrangement of (divided) sovereign states under a (further divided) federal government is Yaltabaoth. Yes, the American constitution takes on the attributes of Yaltabaoth.

The experts proclaim, “Our interpretations of the American Constitution facilitate the construction of a massive, centralized, ‘federal’ government.”

Finally, the Progressive true believer replaces me.

0252 Here is what this fusion looks like, as a suprasovereign religion.

0253 If this looks completely nonsensical, then I am making myself clear.

These substitutions are creative efforts to fuse American and Gnostic relational objects. In this fusion, the American relational object is totally eclipsed, explaining why federally funded educational programs are complete gibberish.

What does the American Constitution have to do with increasing student Self-Esteem?

0254 The original American relational object – the Constitution – acts like Freudian psychology.

The original Constitution aims to strengthen the ego. It extols responsibility and freedom. It puts the Self in front of an altar of one’s own choosing. The Self is not supposed to worship Itself.  The Self is supposed to worship (not accuse) the Other.

If that altar is Christian, then the ego is not separated from the Self along the axis of material and immaterial. The resurrection of Jesus demonstrates that.

0255 Well then, I am talking about the presence underlying the word “Gnosticism”

I just completed my treatment of Gnosticism as a suprasovereign religion.

0256 Burfeind lays out two Gnostic movements. One infuses Gnostic myth with Christian words. The other infuses Gnostic myth with American terms. In both cases, the relational object of the Gnostic suprasovereign religionconfounds the word-meanings of the infiltrated host.

This is why Burfeind wrote Gnostic America.  As a Lutheran minister, he sees both types of Gnosticism.  Each is crazy in its own way. Or, I should say?… Each is opportunistic in its own way.

0257 I now turn to the treatment of Gnosticism as a suite of infrasovereign religions.

Gnosticism infiltrates institutions, turning them into infrasovereign religions.

Unfortunately, the organizational objectives within any infiltrated institution cannot be taken at face value. 

How should I appreciate Gnostic organizational objectives when nothing is what it seems to be?

How do I unlock secrets held within the myth?

0258 Is it fair to compare the Gnostic origin myth to models concerning the presence underlying the word “religion”?

I hope so, because that is what I intend to do.

Two relevant interscopes appear in How To Define the Word “Religion”.

One interscope models the society tier_C.  The society tier_C is composed of the three levels of institution_a, sovereign_band suprasovereign_c religion.

The other interscope models the three tiers of society_C, organization_B and individual in community (IiC)_A.  Each tier is an interscope containing three levels.  I call this model the three-tier system.

0259 The following sections detail this comparison.

I start by comparing the Gnostic myth to a model of the society tier.

0260 The society tier_C is modeled as an interscope. The three nested forms look like this:

0261 The word “power” is equivocal.  Sovereign offices carry sovereign power.  Institutions carry disciplinary power.  Power is witnessed in its exercise.

0262 The working model of the Gnostic origin myth looks like this:

0263 Let me juxtapose each virtual nested form according to category, starting with firstness.

The comparison is remarkable.

0264 Id^real and id^fantasy may be viewed as two different qualities of righteousness.

Id^real relies on the righteousness of Yaltabaoth and the Establishment. Yaltabaoth and the Establishment provide accounts for everything one might encounter. The ego is confident in its pursuits involving material concerns.

0265 Both id^real and id^fantasy are virtually situated by possibilities of determining my form.

This matches the possibility of order.

0266 Id^fantasy-fed experiences of the Self, then, may interfere with the possibility of Yaltabaoth and the Establishment maintaining order. Id^real-fed accountings by the ego reinforce the possibility of order. The association re-iterates the concept of the Self as subversive.

0267 Id^real feeds into determinations of my form that contribute to order.

Surely, that sounds like Freud’s depiction of the desires underlying the ego.  The reality principle_1a terminates in order. Id^real does not proceed to the perspective level because order manifests continuity with the perspective level.  Order takes the big picture for granted.

0268 Id^fantasy feeds into determinations of my form that will be put into perspective by potentials within the Monad. The Monad acts to reify possibilities within id^fantasy.

0269 In a previous example, I experienced a fantasy. I felt that there ought to be a world where friends never lie to one another.

The Monad responded by saying, “Yes, I am that world.”

To me, the Monad corresponds to Utopia.  “Utopia” is a word that literally translates into no where.

So, when I go off to find my Self.  I will be going no where.  Plus, in order to get there, I will have to get around Yaltabaoth and the Establishment.

0270 Here is a juxtaposition of the virtual nested forms in the category of secondness.

0271 Here, the organizational objective_2a directly matches the ego and the Self_2a.

If the organizational objective is development, then there are two types of development. Yaltabaoth and the Establishment develop my ego. Sophia develops my Self. One exercises the authority of the sovereign. The other exercises no authority whatsoever. Instead, it judges the sovereign as inadequate in regards to the potential of Utopia.

0272 For example, the establishment accepts the drama where one friend lies to another and says, “Deal with it.” 

Sophia finds all that terrible. From the point of view of Utopia, almost everything that Yaltabaoth and the Establishment do is unacceptable. The Self may encounter constant rage.  The Self may yearn to fly, like a bird, over the Establishment level to Sophia.

0273 The ego engages a world manufactured by the builder gods. The ego obeys the laws and decrees of the sovereign. The ego adapts to exercises of sovereign power. The ego deals with rules.

The Self says, “This is not right for me.” 

0274 The Self, therefore, makes no effort of obey or defy sovereign laws and decrees. It does not seek to organize resistance. It does not say, “I will do what I am told to do.” It does not seek to build a better world. Instead, it seeks to fly.

Fly away.

This is the organizational objective_2a of type 1 Gnosticism.

0275 The Self constructs wings of secret knowledge. These wings are magical. They can lift the Self towards the immaterial Sophia through manipulations of the material realm.

Like Utopia, Sophia is a destination. She is Personified Wisdom, despite her apparently foolish role in giving birth to the current Yaltabaoth and Establishment. She represents the object that will bring the Self into relation with It-Self.

Be your Self.  Find your Self.

0276 Once I make it to Sophia, ecstatic union ensues.

Now, I may discard my wings.

Why?

No one can assume that I am here. If you come to my door, Personified Wisdom will answer.

0277 Here is the comparison in the category of thirdness:

0278 When a Sufi mystic writes poetry, the superego is gone. There is no institution, no organizational objective and no righteousness. The Sufi poet revels in a mystical union with God.  God occupies the place of Sophia.  God is Personified Wisdom.

0279 Has the Sufi poet disappeared?

Don’t make assumptions, because the poet has been assumed.

0280 In Christian tradition, two figures were assumed. One was Enoch, whose assumption is mentioned in passing in the Genesis genealogies (Gen. 5:21-25). The other was Mary, the Mother of Jesus.

0281 Both mark the passing of one age into another.

Enoch marked the passing of the age of Adam. This age extends from (say) the first singularity to early religious and political consolidations within unconstrained complexity. It goes from the early Ubaid to the late Uruk. The story of the Flood is found in both Old Testament and Sumerian mythology. It corresponds a catastrophe in late Uruk period.

Mary also marks the passing of an age. This age extends from Adam to Jesus. It goes from 0 U0’ to around 6800 U0’. The Old Testament prepares the way for the coming of the Messiah.

Then, oops, Jesus appears and rises from the dead.

0282 Metaphorically, the Self who achieves ecstatic union with Sophia has been assumed. The Self does not walk in the halls of power. The Self does not dwell in the world of mindless reason. The Self de-institutionalizes the superego. The pleroma is the passing age.

0283 This is characteristic of type 1 Gnosticism.

Its object^organization_2a concerns Self-actualization regardless of the present regime.

0284 I now compare the Gnostic myth to the sociological model of a three-tier system.

The three-tiered system of society_C, organization_B and individual in community (IiC)_A consists of three tiers of interscopes.  The model contains nine nested forms.  In the following diagram, I merely label each level within each tier. Each level represents a nested form. 

0285 Typically, the three-tier system is depicted as three columns of interscopes.

Here, the three-tier system is depicted as three rows.

0286 The working model of the Gnostic origin myth looks like this:

Each element in the working model of the Gnostic origin myth will associate to a nested form (or level) within a tier.  This explains why the tiers are set as rows, instead of columns.

0287 Let me look at each virtual nested form according to category, starting with first row. 

0288 The correspondence is rich and nuanced. 

The content or impression level of the IiC associates to the id, implying that the id colors my impressions right from the start. I am always on the lookout for impressions that actualize id^real and id^fantasy. I am always on the lookout for desire.

0289 If I have good Freudian ego-function, I spend my time reckoning. The relation between reckoning (taking care of business) and phantasm (fantasizing me in the situation) parallels the relation between the ego and the Self. Reckoning and phantasm divide along the material-immaterial axis that defines the Gnostic worldview.

0290 The superego is the normal context in which the ego takes responsibility for the Self. The ego also acts in the Name of the Self. The superego associates with judgment. Judgment is an operation of the formal intellect.  Judgment puts reckonings and phantasms into a normal context.

0291 The correspondence becomes more nuanced when the entire nested form is substituted in for each level.

Here, I use Suarez’s model of ens rationis for the IiC tier.

0292 To me, these associations show how Freud was on target. However, Freud’s model of the human psyche did not include the Self. Instead, Freudian therapy tried to identify causes giving rise to id^fantasy.

0293 Theoretically, if id^fantasy could be attributed to some past trauma or poorly regulated drive, then the ego could adapt to the cause through the reality principle. That, at least, is what Freud reckoned.

0294 Jung knocked the wind out of Freud by proposing the other element in the dyad of actuality, the Self. Freud, following the scientific tradition, never even imagined a feature of actuality that experienced, but was not concerned about, what was actually going on.

0295 Id^real was focused on what actually was going on.

Id^fantasy was a separate river within the human psyche, generating wishes that could not be fulfilled by the ego. Why could the ego not fulfill them? They belonged to an immaterial world. They were fantasies.

0296 Ironically, Freud tried to correct for a Gnostic infiltration. Jung revealed the Gnostic infiltration and declared it to be a goal in itself. The goal is to listen to the phantasms.

This is all part of Burfeind’s story.

0297 What followed Jung?

Intellectuals generated a cottage industry devoted to Self-actualization.

Now, the Gnostic division of the material and immaterial worlds comes into play.  The material world is evil.  It may be re-formed.  Not by anyone.  Only the actualized Self need apply.

0298 In the following figure, evil is in brown and good is in red.

0299 What is good?

The association between experience (encountered being) and id^fantasy is situated by the association between phantasm and Self.  The pop-psychology term is “Self-awareness”.

0300 What is evil?

Everything else.

The superego is revealed to be a list of conclusions made by the formal intellect.

The ego is simply a mechanical reckoning based on the superego’s list of conclusions. The ego naively explains experiences according to the reality principle (id^real).

0301 The only feature that is not mechanically driven is the Self.

Consequently, there is no need to reflect on my reckoning.  I need to channel id^fantasy.  I need to make my phantasm a direct pipeline to my Self.

Or…

I can make my Self into the normal context of me (as an IiC).

0302 Suddenly, all the evil of materiality slips away from me onto everyone else.  Self and phantasm fuse. 

0303 My Self directly contextualizes my fantasy-inspired encounters with others.  All the actuality of Freud’s schema of the human psyche condenses into the evil thing that my Self gets around or manipulates.

Also, Freud’s schema is projected onto others, since my Self abandons my ego. My ego is merely a (disposable) shell of my Self.  My body is an instrument to be used at the pleasure of my Self.

0304 Secret knowledge replaces reflective reason. My formal intellect operates within the normal context of Gnostic thought. It all comes together in my Self.

0305 The difficult business of the Real becomes projected onto others as conditioning [causes] material concerns and material concerns [are driven by] reality-principle goals.

0306 Here is a slogan of type 2 Gnosticism: Change the conditioning and then the subject will gain in Self-awareness and lose material concerns.

0307 This is foundational to type 2 Gnostic interventions. 

Subjects (or ego-driven others) are not really human, they are machines driven by material concerns. Destroy the factory in which they operate, then the machines will lose their (matter-based) reality principle. Then, they will realize the divine spark, the Self, within them.

If they persist with their bodily concerns, then they are evil.

0308 How are they evil?

0309 This diagram illuminates the rhetoric of type 2 Gnosticism.

0310 The person who is not Self-actualized is a lower class (if at all) human.

The Self-actualized are anointed to intervene in order to lessen the damage that these ego-driven machine-humans do.  The Self-actualized are anointed to create religious systems that take care of the ego-driven folk’s material concerns, thereby opening a path to Self-actualization for the few intelligent enough to take it.

0311 The ego-driven folk reply, “Your views will have horrible consequences.”

This is interpreted, by the Self-anointed, to mean, “You admit that I am Self-actualized. You reveal that you are trapped in Yaltabaoth’s illusion of natural laws and social norms.  Therefore, you are responsible for what you call horrible consequences.”

0312 Here are some classic projections.

I (the Self-actualized) am “scientific”, you (the ego-driven) are “superstitious”.

I (the Self-anointed) say, “Well, that is you’re opinion.”

I (the Self-realized) say, “You are a X-ist (insert race, sex, and so on for X), full of bad intentions.”

I (the Self-enlightened) wonder, “Don’t you want my (impossible to achieve) ideal?  If not, you are a monster.”

0313 Once the Self becomes the normal context_3a for a superego(ego(id^real)) machine_2a, mechanical implications are projected onto others.

The actuality of the Self-realized person_2a hides behind a veil of projected mechanical implications.  This allows id^fantasy to actualize selfish (as well as unacknowledged ego-driven) behaviors beneath the mask of rightfulness.

0314 Indeed, these selfish behaviors are often perverse.

Here, “perversion” means using an instrument for other than its obvious (typically, biological) purpose. An example?  Pope Francis condemned treating pets as if they were children while ignoring the travails of other humans.

0315 One of the finest pleasures obtained by the Self-actualized is to confound simpletons who try to reason with them.

Does Pope Francis really hate pets?

0316 The Self-actualized interlocutor gives the impression that Pope Francis would snatch dear Fifi away and cook her up for a few homeless kids. Meanwhile, the pampered bejeweled dog, cradled in her owner’s arms, innocently tries to lick her master’s lips.

Don’t you see how Fifi loves me?

0317 This conversation would be a joke if the Self-actualized were not lobbying to spend taxpayer’s money for a grandiose animal hospital.  A taxpayer-financed hospital is needed because common folk don’t treat their pets like children.  They won’t spend what is needed to save their pet in sickness or injury.

Pets are part of our family, too.

0318 In other words, all those ego-driven families, who are slaves to the reality principle, need to have their decisions made for them by the Self-anointed.

0319 Fifi manages to lick the lips of the Self-anointed.

The Self-actualized treats it as a kiss.

The weird attribution of personhood to a dog gives the impression that the Gnostic’s entire world is viewed through the lens of id^fantasy.

In addition, the Self-anointed does not give any indication that the reality principle applies.

The reality principle is the problem of the person who is trying to reason with him or her or… whatever.

The Self-actualized has secret knowledge that is beyond sensible reckoning and contextualizes a phantasm that goes with the preening of the Self and the demonization of the ego-driven.

0320 In the following figure, brown is evil and red is good.

0321 Already, this looks a little scary, since the de-humanization of others is built into the realm of actuality.

Other people are machines or animals or little folk.  They are people possessed by material concerns, the daemons of Yaltabaoth and the Establishment.  As such, they are evil.

0322 In the Gnostic origin myth, the Establishment level is ruled by mindless reason.  The Establishment level is dominated by the builder god and his establishment.  It situates the ego through material concerns.

0323 The establishment level matches the organization tier in the 3-tier system. The comparison follows:

0324 Let me go over the storyline for the organization tier, before delving into the comparison.

Here is how the organization tier goes from content to perspective levels.

The individual in community (IiC) makes a judgment. The judgment inspires the individual to associate with others of similar judgment. If the judgment is about material concerns, then the individual may join or invent an organization. This organization will manage, produce or service these material concerns.

0325 If the organization is a factory, then management, production and service come into play in its operations.  The money brought in from product sales must be greater than all costs of manufacture, delivery and sales.   So, there may be conflict among the various parties within the content-level of the organization tier.  Management always wants to pay less salary than factory workers think they deserve.

0326 The price of the product in the market minus the cost to the worker in the production of the product resembles Marx’s concept of surplus value.  The price is always set to bring in more money than total costs.  The cost to the worker cannot be measured since it involves lost opportunity.  Consequently, Marx’s concept of surplus valueconstitutes secret knowledge.

0327 Goods and services must be marketed. In an open market, the exchange occurs when both parties are willing to exchange something of value. You give me this. I give you that. The exchange would not occur without benefit to both parties.

In market exchange, others participate in the corporation without directly belonging. Whenever I buy a loaf of bread or an automobile, I participate in an organization, even though I think that I am buying a simple commodity.  This is the idea behind Marx’s concept of the commodity fetish.

0328 At crucial junctures, the entire organization must be assessed.  The question is: Do we continue to do what we are doing?

The answer must take into account the institutional mission, as well as the people in management, production, and services.  The answer must take into account market exchange, the sales division, the price of the good, subsidies and taxes, advertising and the participation of others in the organization through purchases.

0329 Marxist theory condenses all these difficult assessments into one factor: capital. This is remarkable, because the status of the balance sheet is a necessary, but not sufficient, feature of an organization’s assessment.  Marxist theory reduces assessment to capitalism.

0330 That reduction constitutes secret knowledge.  Anyone who decries “capitalism” talks Marxist Gnostic lingo.  The lingo’s “secret” is that assessment in the organization_cB tier is equivalent to mindless rationality_3b.  If that were the case, then stressed-out assessors would be liberated from both responsibility and freedom.  All the assessors would need to do is follow a recipe.

0331 There is no “ism” for “capital”.  The word “capitalism” is not a religious belief.  Communism, the belief that capital is an undead thing that possesses the souls of assessors, is.  Capitalism is the name applied to assessment by communists.

0332 Capitalism is a projection. Balance sheets are not.

(These topics are discussed in the two Primers on the Organization Tier.)