God interacting with humans.

[Lairg]

34 minutes ago, Nungali said:

You hope to  'control'  Yechida   at some stage ?  

 

All soul-bearing specimens of whatever species are threads from The Source of All.  

 

There is much beyond Yechida that ex-human learns to control (internally) in order to perform its cosmic duties

 

 

 

Edited 17 hours ago by Lairg

[BigSkyDiamond]

1 hour ago, Nungali said:

I should pint out , although you claim something is NOT Kabbalah  due to the reasons you stated , it is still considered  ( pretty widely ) that  hermetic Kabbalah, although not traditional , is a TYPE of Kabbalah . A  simple summary of the 'issue '   -  

Traditional Kabbalah is a Jewish mystical tradition focused on esoteric interpretations of Jewish texts, aiming for communion with the divine. Hermetic Qabalah, on the other hand, is a syncretic system that blends Jewish Kabbalah with other Western esoteric traditions like Hermeticism, Neoplatonism, and astrology, creating a more inclusive and universal framework. While traditional Kabbalah is rooted in Jewish thought, Hermetic Qabalah incorporates elements from various sources to explore the underlying principles of the cosmos. 

 

Then that is a hermetic system based on Greek and Egyptian sources and a collection of other stuff too.   It is not Kabbalah.  It is hermetics.

 

This ties in to what was discussed earlier, a key difference in motivation purpose and goal of the practice.

Magic - the focus is control.  That is a distortion of Kabbalah.  It brings to mind cultural appropriation.  

When something is taken out of context, it becomes distorted.  

"appropriation involves pieces of a culture or religion being taken out of context by a people who lack the cultural context to properly understand, respect, or utilise these elements"

 

Edited 16 hours ago by BigSkyDiamond

[BigSkyDiamond]

if something is "based on" or "draws heavily from"  or is "derived from" to create something new and different, then it goes by a different name.

 

for instance Buddhism came about as an offshoot of Hinduism.  It is known as Buddhism, though.  It does not call itself Hinduism.  So if hermetics has taken elements from other paths and changed them so they are now used in a different context, then that is something different and it goes by a different name.    "Hermetics teaches this"  but not calling it Kabbalah because it isn't anymore.  It has been altered and changed to mean something else.  

 

That's the point I am trying to make.

 

If Burger King copies the Big Mac and puts it on the menu, they don't call it a Big Mac.  They give it a different name.  Because it isn't a Big Mac.  To call it a Big Mac is misleading on a whole lot of levels.

 

 

Edited 15 hours ago by BigSkyDiamond

[Nungali]

 

5 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

The distinguishing feature of Judaism at the time of its inception 3,500 years ago was that it introduced monotheism in a time and place that was decidedly not monotheistic.  Both ancient Egypt and ancient Greek theology was polytheism.    

 

As I said 'academic studies of scripture '       , ' archaeology'    and  'history'    .   I am not just repeating  'say so '  . ( Nor asking AI    )  

 

Scripture ;  many a debate has been had about 'monotheism'  pre Josiah  -  it cant even be  shown in the Bible  -   until his 'temple reforms' and clearing out any one else ( other Canaanite religions )   that previously had a right to use it .  There are many discussions here on it and  the use of terms and gender and pluralisms is relatively well known . 

 

Archaeology .   I recommend Israel Finklestein , he is one of, if not the most experienced in the field and  study of this subject .  Also hos knowledge of the Bible seems immense with instant recall of book chapter and line and all sorts of related information and scribal analysis about  it .  Here you go, I have watched all of them and it well worth it  ( there is more of course , this is just an into to the subject )  ; 

 

 

History .  Another topic I am educated in  (  its ongoing )  so this could be long and vast . But this isn't the place for it . All I will say is , if there WAS some great joined two state nation of Israel   with its own separate  monotheistic religion  and had a great King Solomon and all started back when  the Bible says it was supposed  to  ( actually , back when some bible scholars say it was )  then .... 

 

there is NO other historical accounts about it , in any of the other  surrounding nations  records ... and bearing in mind over the last 20 years or so  a LOT more is coming to light as we get more scholars of cuneiform .. and still nothing ) 

 

One thinks they would have noticed it . 

 

5 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

was that it introduced monotheism in a time and place that was decidedly not monotheistic. 

 

Josiah did that .   He cleared out the temple and made it exclusively monotheistic  and then his scribe' found' the Law during temple renovations and then the Jewish 'Law'  got implemented .   That's in the BIble too . 

 

Do I need to cite the passages  ?  

 

It also says the Egyptian Pharaoh  was following God's will and Josiah opposed him .  He was told he would be punished for disobeying Gods will from an Egyptians mouth  but Josiah went ahead .... and got shot full of arrows and died  .

 

Its in the Bible . 

 

( The Hebrew Bible that is ) 

 

 

5 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

 

 

Both ancient Egypt and ancient Greek theology was polytheism.    

 

Not all of it . Particularly Socrates  is debatable . There are varieties of ancient Greek belief  as there was in ancient Egypt .

 

" There are ideas in ancient Ællînismόs, which border on, hint at, and even teach monotheism "

 

https://www.hellenicgods.org/monotheism-in-hellenismos  

 

And Egypt ?   Well, 'The Aten' had a go there for a while .   Besides that , its similar to the situation in Greece .   It was at times , at least henotheistic .   There are variant traditions in 'Egypt' as well , sometimes to lump them all together is misguiding . The main one perhaps , in relation to monotheistic ideas would be the Heliopolitan   where Atum is the lone self creating God , who created others .  The Memphite with Ptah is similar .  Some others have a set of 8 or a triad as originating Gods . 

 

Atum is often given as the closest example .

 

If any ideas where borrowed in to Judaism  they would have undergone some transformation in any case . And again , the form of monotheism we most often think of did not exist until Josiah's time ... it was  a political move on his part to seize both kingdoms  ... Dr Finkelstein can explain it a lot more detailed and with historical, Biblical and archaeological references for all of it . 

 

 

 

[BigSkyDiamond]

2 hours ago, Nungali said:

As I said 'academic studies of scripture '       , ' archaeology'    and  'history'   

there is NO other historical accounts about it

 

God is not in the history books either, nor is God found in archaeology.

God is not investigated by the fields of history, academia, and archaeology.

 

The study of religion by "academic and historians and archaeologists"

is not the practice of religion.  

 

Sacred texts are not a history book.  Religion and spirituality is not a history lesson.  If someone treats them as such, then they are laboring under a misconception.

 

Edited 9 hours ago by BigSkyDiamond

[Lairg]

It is worth reading Fomenko's statistical analysis of the patterns repeating in official histories - change the date and a few names.

 

For example the astrological charts in the ceilings of 30 ancient Egyptian tombs, when entered into computer software, are uniformly dated to our Middle Ages.  How could that happen?

 

https://www.amazon.com.au/History-Fiction-Science-Chronology-1/dp/1703003144

 

Start here

https://archive.org/details/history-fiction-or-science-vol.-1

 

I have read the first 4 volumes, accordingly I do not trust historical accounts of any religion

 

I am reminded:  "It is too hard.  I cannot hear it"

 

 

[BigSkyDiamond]

I'm here to discuss the practices and belief systems, and how individuals understand and implement in our daily lives, in our personal practice.  I have no interest in what historians and academics and scientists say regarding God, Divinity, Beingness, reincarnation, or exiting the cycle of rebirth.  Their views are irrelevant.  Their expertise is simply not theology.

 

Edited 10 hours ago by BigSkyDiamond

[BigSkyDiamond]

1 hour ago, Lairg said:

I do not trust historical accounts of any religion

 

or as my dear Grandfather said "Do you know what history is?  It is his   story. "

 

Edited 9 hours ago by BigSkyDiamond

[Cobie]

 

15 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

…

Ruach
the primary manifestation of Ruach is in the emotions 

…

 

For me “emotions” is  ‘water’. For me reminiscent of Genesis 1.2, … the Spirit of God (wind) was hovering over the face of the waters (water)

cf.

風水 (feng1 shui3) wind and water; Fengshui (which is not just geomancy)

 

 

Edited 2 hours ago by Cobie

[manitou]

On 4/8/2025 at 11:09 AM, Cadcam said:

Suppose, as many do, that God and the devil are real. These beings and their kin interact with humans to guide and mold identity and actions. Do you suppose they would rather that one was aware of this interaction, or oblivious to it?

 

 

I think it's helpful, for full understanding, not to look at a god as a separate being from us.  I don't think there's anything out there that would rather be aware of an interaction.  We are the whole enchilada.  This is what self realization is about - our true identity.  And to bring a devil into it is just plain silly.

Edited 1 hour ago by manitou

[BigSkyDiamond]

4 minutes ago, manitou said:

 

I think it's helpful, for full understanding, not to look at a god as a separate being from us.  I don't think there's anything out there that would rather be aware of an interaction.  We are the whole enchelada.  This is what self realization is about - our true identity.

 

yes. And there are traditions which teach that:  

God is both transcendent ("out there") and also immanent ("in here" within us).

 

There is no separation.  first i have to get that intellectually as an idea; then i have to put it into practice and release my belief in separation.

 

Edited 1 hour ago by BigSkyDiamond

[Cobie]

 

19 minutes ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

… there are traditions which teach that:  God is both transcendent ("out there") and also immanent ("in here" within us). …

 

Definitely, I (RC) belief God is omnipresent.

 

 

[BigSkyDiamond]

On 6/21/2025 at 7:05 AM, Jadespear said:

The gist of what you are saying is basically what?  You want to be someone who does nothing in the world, but sits around and observes it? 

 

Cultivating stillness and pure awareness are not "someone who does doing nothing in the world."

This excerpt from a post on another thread resonates deeply for me.

Also no thing is not the same as nothing.  They are separate and distinct.   God is not a "thing"  (has no form, is not separate).  But God is not "nothing" (absence, lack, gone).

 

2 hours ago, stirling said:

When you meet a patch of stillness in the mind

there ARE no things, just the dao, empty and aware.

 

allow the thoughts to come to rest again,

and there is the dao, where it has always been... now, here, with no observer,

only the stillness and the un-labelled phenomena that arise in it.

 

It is causeless, timeless, spaceless and has always been, and always will be present,

un-affected by the illusory world of "myriad things" and yet containing that world.