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 yesterday at 12:41 AM 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 yesterday at 01:29 AM 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 yesterday at 03:08 AM 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 yesterday at 08:24 AM 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 yesterday at 07:54 AM 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 yesterday at 08:43 AM 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 19 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 18 hours 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 18 hours ago by BigSkyDiamond

[Cobie]

.

Edited 15 hours ago by Cobie

[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 (below) 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. 

 

 

for me just reading that (post above from stirling)

drops me into a place of stillness.  There is a transmission beyond the words.

 

Edited 16 hours ago by BigSkyDiamond

[Nungali]

20 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

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.

 

It is hermetic Kabbalah  , its well known  and has numerous references to it . This isn't just me claiming stuff .

 

I don't see how one can say it isn't Kabbalah it is hermetics  when   some of hermetics incorporated a type of Kabbalah.

 

I am not saying you have to like it     ... its just the way it is . 

 

 

20 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

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

Magic - the focus is control. 

 

Well of course the motivation is going to be different than what a  Jewish person practicing traditional Kabbalah  would be , because they are not Jewish .

 

20 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

 

 That is a distortion of Kabbalah.  It brings to mind cultural appropriation.  

 

It does ?   Like the  butchered version of the Bible being used as the Christian Old Testament ? 

 

if we go down that path then the whole of hermetics is    as it comes from Alexandria and the Alexandrian Synthesis , a blend of the knowledge that came into that place at that time ; Greek, Egyptian , Zoroastrian , Jewish  , etc . 

 

And further , the construction of Judaism was eclectic as well  ... or  'bringing to mind'    cultural appropriation . 

 

And further still , does not Islam have some 'Jewish founders' in its story as well ?   Shared info  / roots  or cultural appropriation ? 

 

 

20 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

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"

 

 

Its an unusual track to go down for a non orthodox Jew relating to Kabbalah though  , if you are not that I wonder why you bring all this up , under the definition it applies to  Judaism , Kabbalah, Christianity , Islam  .   .  .  .   

 

Or , some call it  'synthesis '   .  Also there is the factor of 'progressive revelation ' and with that associated  practices and teachings ... in short  ' things move on and times and environment changes  .  Some practices are a  'technology of the psyche ' and are not dependent on belief systems  or  old or current belief systems . 

 

And there is much more in the valid magical tradition than  'seeking control '  .

[BigSkyDiamond]

deleted

Edited 12 hours ago by BigSkyDiamond

[Nungali]

21 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

Then that is a hermetic system based on Greek and Egyptian sources and a collection of other stuff too.  

 

Yes it is  . It  was an eclectic system developed within the Alexandrian Synthesis .   If its not understood I better explain . Alexandria was where it was at , the 'modern '  metro , ships came in from all over  and HAD TO hand  any written material in for copying and lodging in the library there . Most have heard of this library . The knowledge got synthesized  and drawn together and preserved .  Later the center moved to Harran in  Syria  and from there it was picked up by early Islam  which helped to boost that into an age of medicine and sciences  and eventually led to 'The Enlightenment ' of Europe . 

 

We can call it  ' appropriation'  or we can call it   'synthesis '  .    However it is known as the Alexandrian Synthesis and not the Alexandrian Cultural Appropriation . 

 

 

21 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

 

It is not Kabbalah.  It is hermetics.

 

No hermetics is not Kabbalah  -  Hermetics incorporates hermetic Kabbalah  though .

 

 

 

21 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

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.  

 

To see magic as only control is a distortion of magic  as well .  In my experience the requirement to be familiar with certain aspects of the hermetic kabbalah , and the results from that practice were not about controlling anything at all , they were about realizing the relationship of one thing to another  and 'fields of resonance '  with the end result of gaining understanding of how everything relates to each other . 

 

Now I cant speak to what others claim ,  to what depths they sink or to what YouTube's or products they sell on line . Like the eastern magical arts and practices there is a lot of 'pollution' out there  . 

 

Including a lot of westerners that have 'appropriated '   eastern practices   ....... hmmmmmm  . 

 

 

 

21 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

"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"

 

 

Synthesis 

 

"  the mixing of different ideas, influences, or things to make a whole that is different, or new: " 

[Nungali]

15 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

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.

 

Now you have taken an interesting and different tac all of a sudden .   YOU made an historical claim , I refute it ,  and showed extensive support academically for my views ( which you did not )  now its not about an historical claim at all .  Its about  'God '  . 

 

I think that is a version of 'shifting the goal posts '  ?  

 

15 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

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

is not the practice of religion.  

 

No it isn't , but why state that all of a sudden ?     YOU claimed and origin and  date for  a certain religion , not some   theological issue about God  or the practice of religion . And that date you claimed  was in response  to a question of 'transference ' of originating ideas   relating to Greek influences on Kabbalah and other things  ... so it WAS an historical issue . 

 

I am guessing you have become invested in certain 'belief systems '   that include this  'story ' .  . .  as other have   that  feel uncomfortable or angry about this subject .

 

 

 

15 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

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.

 

 

Okay you are going to divert and take that tac then  . All I can say , if you cant take the heat ... you should not have stepped into the kitchen 

 

and that means  , if you don't want to talk  religious history then don't make claims about the DATES of origins yourself . 

 

 

[BigSkyDiamond]

22 hours ago, Lairg said:

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

... ex-human learns to control (internally) in order to perform its cosmic duties

 

So for me to understand clearly:  Then ex-human refers to no longer incarnating as a physical human.  But still active in the cosmos (still within the universe).  So not in physical form but in say non physical form somewhere else in the universe. Is that what is described?  And the cosmic duties, are they self-assigned, or assigned by a hierarchy of say other cosmic beings.  Sort of like me being given other tasks or homework to do.  Am i tracking this accurately?  Thank you.

 

I am thinking of traditions which speak to ending the cycle of rebirth as a stage we reach in our development.  To my way of understanding, that is exiting the universe altogether, not just continuing to hang out in the universe in non-physical form.  I have also heard that in some paths a being can choose to stay in the universe to help or assist others in their growth.  And that when we reach that point we are given the choice of whether to do this.  I am always interested to hear more on this.

 

Edited 12 hours ago by BigSkyDiamond

[Nungali]

14 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

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

 

 

If you don't make claims about it then , they will not be addressed .   Then you will not have to try to cancel them out  by using cliches .

 

YOU claimed a certain religion started at a certain date and made other claims about historical influences  ( by  denying them )   as part of a back up or some type of proof or evidence to an idea you had preceding that  ... and now you are showed on a detailed academic level it is incorrect ( which also means the premise you were using it  for is not supported by it ) .  And now you protest as it isn't about the history ... when you made an historical claim as supportive evidence .

 

 

[Nungali]

6 hours 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 enchilada.  This is what self realization is about - our true identity.  And to bring a devil into it is just plain silly.

 

Where have YOU been    !  ?        (Did you miss me too ?   )   

 

How I have missed your often 'common sense '  .   

 

We should have dinner together  .... I suggest  misteka veggie enchiladas    

 

https://thedevilwearsparsley.com/2020/05/05/enchilada-sauce/

[Lairg]

2 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

ex-human refers to no longer incarnating as a physical human

 

I am referring to not belonging to the human kingdom.   There are perhaps 5% of those in human format that do not belong to the human kingdom.

 

Thus the initiate may now belong to the higher deva (or other) kingdom but retain the human incarnation while convenient

 

2 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

in say non physical form somewhere else in the universe

 

There are many great entities that each emanate myriad lines of light into various universes and species - even into Earth humans.  Thus the entity is parallel processing on many planes, timelines and species.  Better perhaps to consider each inner plane initiate as an anchor of a much greater entity rather than as a free-standing incarnation

 

2 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

the cosmic duties, are they self-assigned

 

There are said to be some stages at which choice by the initiate is possible - perhaps the choice of cosmic path

 

https://www.light-weaver.com/LW-old/initiation/7paths/rays.excerpts/path7.html

 

Consider however the role of the human mother.  Once birth has occurred, how many choices does the mother have?

 

Mostly the inner plane initiates do whatever tasks are in front of them, as they learn the use of Intent (Atma and higher analogues) and operationalize their participation in Beingness 

 

Always the initiates anchor one or more threads of Light from much greater entities.

 

2 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

ending the cycle of rebirth

 

Ending the uncontrolled cycle is a significant stage in the maturity of the initiate.  It does not mean however, that the initiate abandons the species/planet that has cared for him/her for so long.

 

2 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

not just continuing to hang out in the universe in non-physical form

 

Both my parents, immediately after their deaths, told me of the groups to which they had been assigned.  My mother was learning to manage planetary meridians (and has now been promoted), and my father was learning about relationships.

 

2 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

in some paths a being can choose to stay in the universe to help or assist others in their growth.

 

Certainly true.  But what of those posted into this solar system?  Are they free to depart after each incarnation?    Long ago I worked as a casual laborer - typically the engagement was "job and finish".  The faster we  worked, the sooner we could go home.

 

As below, so above

 

 

 

Edited 9 hours ago by Lairg

[BigSkyDiamond]

9 minutes ago, Lairg said:

Certainly true.  But what of those posted into this solar system?  Are they free to depart after each incarnation?    Long ago I worked as a casual laborer - typically the engagement was "job and finish".  The faster we  worked, the sooner we could go home.

 

As below, so above

 

so then it sounds like there is an end point reached for leaving the universe completely.  

What determines or qualifies a being for that?  

and to continue on instead at a different plane than "the universe and everything in it" 

 

thank you for responses.

[Lairg]

This universe belongs to a cluster of universes, and then to a cluster of clusters, and then to...

 

We all get drawn to the center of The Source of All according to our alignment (of/with light flows), refinement (of plane energies) and intent (inner decision)

 

41 minutes ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

there is an end point reached for leaving the universe completely.  

 

It is called the Mahapralaya.  It is the gap between cessation of this universe and the appearance of the next version of this universe

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 8 hours ago by Lairg

[BigSkyDiamond]

42 minutes ago, Lairg said:

This universe belongs to a cluster of universes, and then to a cluster of clusters, and then to...

We all get drawn to the center of The Source of All according to our alignment (of/with light flows), refinement (of plane energies) and intent (inner decision)

It is called the Mahapralaya.  It is the gap between cessation of this universe and the appearance of the next version of this universe

 

yes many many universes, i agree, that makes sense.

all of which are finite, yes, so they have a beginning and an end.

as a being i am not finite so i continue in the "gap" between universes.

And so when the next universe appears does the being jump into that and the work duties resume?

 

all the universes are finite.  (the term i use for that is the worlds of Separation; or in the parlance of the Dao "the ten thousand things").  as a being however i am infinite (Beingness).  so in recognizing the limitations of the finite by inhabiting them.   there is reaching the point of "enough is enough" so it is off to have other different adventures which are NOT in the worlds of Separation, and thus are not finite.

 

the repetitive universes are a dead end in the sense it is the same thing over and over.  There may be different jobs, different tasks, different challenges and problems to solve , different roles, different skills to develop.  I guess what i'm asking sensing naming intending, is as an infinite being to stop repeating going back to the successive universes.  which is a version of the same cycle as reincarnation.  Infinite Beingness (which we are) is more vast than repetitive finite universes.  That is my intention and orientation.  So here i am looking for maps   : )  Thanks Lairg for this conversation.

 

In a sense it feels like a soul retrieval.  Rescuing and retrieving a sliver of fragmented limited awareness that is  human me in this lifetime.  That  just needs to reconnect with the rest of me, the Beingness that never entered the worlds of Separation.  I have remembered who I am and what I am and where I belong; now I need to get out and return.

 

 

 

Edited 8 hours ago by BigSkyDiamond

[Lairg]

1 hour ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

I have remembered who I am and what I am and where I belong; now I need to get out and return.

 

Is that a half-remembering?