- This topic has 2,621 replies, 146 voices, and was last updated hace 1 día, 21 hours by
.
- Respuestas
If we are pressured by the surrounding light and the kli empties… and we are exposed to this emptiness, the darkness…and all it feels like is that basically all we can achieve is separation and darkness, because we have nothing to give, and we don’t have the faith to truly overcome , because all we feel is the lack… what is the flaw in this? How do we correct our perception? How can we have faith when we don’t feel connection, creator, whatsoever…?
Are we talking about the actions we hear about in the Upper World, like in Adam Kadmon? Those are not states of darkness. Even if we’re talking about our work…you started with “we are pressured by the Surrounding Light and the Kli empties…” Those are already beautiful spiritual states where we’re already in the Upper Worlds. There is no darkness there. Once the Kli tastes the inner light, it weakens us – because we want to bestow more – and we have to leave the state. It happens that that’s the closest to Equivalence with the Creator that we can be, for now.
The darkness in our state is that we both wouldn’t choose this state, and furthermore, disagree with it fairly completely. But this reality is for me to have an opportunity to study myself: the still, vegetative, animate, speaking is a demonstration of what’s inside of me. That’s why it is written love your friend as yourself, which helps you correct your inner vessel, shown to you as if it’s outside of you. We have to very seriously integrate with the friends, to see this.
Then, eventually you reach a state where you feel, in the ten, and only there, in a Partzuf, the bitush of panim and makif (striking of the Surrounding Light and the Inner Light), that some of the Light must stay outside, and so on. This is already not a state of darkness, whether Lights goes in or out or stays outside…
When we say “Creator” – is here also the Sitra Achra included? Yes, Shamati 1 says we shouldn’t think there would be something like Sitra Achra, that would be a heresy and a transgression, although there is much described and said in the sages about this. So, we say “Creator” with an eye-wink, meaning, the Creator is also the “bad” what is not suppossed to exist and we’re not suppossed to admit? And how can we comee to Truth and to bestowal, if we do like described?
It’s simply that the Creator does absolutely everything, but most of what He does, we perceive in our ego as bad, while in reality, everything is gifts from the Creator.
Do we mean the One who made the Heavens? Until now we learn of Him only as the Maker of the light the earth and man. But we don’t mean the One who made the Heavens and the Elochim who made the light, right? Also, I heard Rav saying there is no Creator until we make Him, and He is (only) the next degree. Am grateful for help to order here, thank you
Dear Gianni,
What does Baal HaSulam mean when he talks about “purification of the body”? (For example in the first few paragraphs of Introduction to the Study of the Ten Sefirot)
Thank you ❤️
Purification of the Will to Receive, the cleansing of the quality of Malchut from the quality of Bina, so that it can exist in the quality of bestowal without the Will to Receive mixed in it.
Centuries ago, there were some who could advance that way because they had a very small Will to Receive. Most people were living nearly that way to begin with. So, you could try to afflict the Will to Receive even more so it had nothing but to let you go toward spirituality. But most still were not awarded, as Baal HaSulam says. That’s why we are grateful to the Kabbalists who made such corrections in the system that we can advance not through mortifications of the body, but through the Reforming Light in the study of Kabbalah. And with that, the door closed to advancement via bodily mortifications.
Regarding the recording of Rabash yesterday:
When the refinement of the screen causes a feeling of deficiency because the light is ejected, and the light exits through the peh. Is that because the calculation (screen) was a declaration of intent towards the light, not to receive it, because reasons. And that’s why it comes out through the mouth?
I don’t have “declaration of intent toward the light” in my lexicon. When the Screen rises to the Peh, then the Light is gone from the Guf, and the Guf is deficient of that Light which it had. The Peh is simply that crucial point at which all the Light has exited.
We don’t usually say it that way, but it is expelled by the Screen, which is an expression of the intention to maintain the First Restriction. In truth, there is a question if we can use ‘kavana’ in this place, where it’s talking about ‘from above downward’. I would wait and see if Baal HaSulam uses those words.
Gianni, does the tree of knowledge indeed have 11 Sefirot through the ‘Daat’? Is the tree of knowledge the realm of Sitra Achra, which have a domination over the tree of life? I’m watching right now your last session of SMWF and some previous info about these issues seem to emerge together arising these questions. Also: roughly exactly expressed: ‘Bina clothed in Malchut is the worst state’ – how can Bina liberate herself from this state!? Consider that she prays for the liberation like crazy and counters and adjusts all thoughts and deeds the best she can according to the teachings in order to be on ‘the right side’. Is urgent! Thank you!
Tree of knowledge it is called if he wants to receive within reason, tree of life if he only goes above reason. Because I can’t receive from Above down, in my nature as it is. The goal was to invert my nature to that of the Creator, bestowal. That’s why I’m not allowed to receive from the tree of knowledge.
Bina can’t rescue herself from within the Malchut except by someone else coming to her rescue. She has the key for the others’ cells, they hold the key to hers. She can scream all she wants as a prisoner in solitary confinement can scream all they want.
Does “coarse light” refer to future states we can see we want, but don’t have a corrected vessel to receive it yet? The future state doesn’t look right to us, because we’re still perceiving it through a lens of reception instead of bestowal, so the light seems “coarse”?
No, this is already territory where there isn’t even an analogy from our lives.
The Direct Light is called refined light, and the Reflected Light that emerges in the Rosh is called Coarse Light because it is extended by the force of the Aviut (coarseness) and Tzimzum (Restriction) in the Masach (Screen) of Malchut of the Rosh.
Because the lower one felt the will to receive on which there was judgment upon its coarseness. This is the foundation on which the Ohr Hozer [Reflected Light] is built. So, it’s called Coarse Light.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.