- This topic has 1,433 replies, 550 voices, and was last updated hace 2 días, 17 hours by
.
- Respuestas
In the video Tony mentions that we are going to learn about authentic Kabbalah and from a perspective of practitioners. I am curious to know if at any point in the course we will hear from Tony or read in other materials what the opinion is of other Kabbalist teachers that can be found on YouTube like David Ghyiam. My question is not meant to introduce conflict, but rather to understand viewpoints and perspectives on how this class might differ from the videos and courses he shares.
In my very limited and cursory review, it mainly feels to be a difference between audience and approach. However, since I am early in this course with KabU, I hope to gain more insight from those who are much more familiar with the nuance of Kabbalah.
Hi Albertina,
There are many spiritual methods out there, even among those that also teach Kabbalah, but in KabU we follow the method of Baal HaSulam as he taught Rabash, who taught Rav Laitman, who is the teacher of Tony and the rest of the KabU staff.
We don’t mix other methods into it because it will corrupt the results we’re trying to reach. Sort of like trying to replicate a science experiment without following the procedures in the original experiment. Or like following two GPS systems simultaneously, one leads you to the goal through the west highway, while the other through the east highway. If we follow both, we’ll just wind up going in circles.
So I’m not saying what others are teaching is wrong, but if we want to succeed in this method, we should not mix anything else into it.
Albert @ KabU
In the texts, the “will to receive” is described as the essence of creation. At the same time, egoism — receiving for oneself — is considered the root of all evil and separation from the Creator.
Should we clearly distinguish between the “will to receive” and “egoism”? Are they identical, or does egoism only emerge when the will to receive becomes self-centered and conscious?
Genesis says that creation was “very good” — yet egoism is described as the very thing that makes us unlike the Creator. How can creation be called good if its fundamental nature leads to separation and evil?
Is there a coherent way to understand this paradox — that we were created with something (the will to receive) which we must then overcome or transform in order to return to the Creator?Hi Blaho,
Our nature is the desire to receive pleasure. It simply means that every calculation we make is to chase pleasure or avoid pain. This is similar to how any other animal functions. By itself, there is nothing wrong with this nature, it’s simply the program by which we function and preserve ourselves.
Egoism is when this program begins to be used in a way that harms others. Not only do I want to receive pleasure, but I want to receive it at the expense of others, at their detriment. This is the corporeal ego.
There is also a spiritual ego. Spiritual egoism is everything that stands in the way of our connection with the Creator. Normal people don’t have a spiritual ego. This is only something that we discover after doing some serious spiritual work.
We’ll learn how to work practically with the spiritual ego in the more advanced semesters. In the meantime, check out this blog post from Rav Laitman for more details: https://laitman.com/2010/10/true-evil/
As for why we were created with egoism even though it separates us from the Creator? That is done on purpose for our own development. It’s just like with kids. We don’t just give them a completed jigsaw puzzle. On the contrary we take it and break it down into many pieces. Then in the process of them putting it together, they grow and develop. Same with us, this process of losing that initial state is a necessary part of our further growth and development.
This process also adds to us a certain level of freedom, without which, we would be no different than machines, or robots, that were programmed to act a certain way and they just carry out this inner script. Instead, we were programmed one way, and we rise above this inner programming, become independent of it, and then develop our own desire to advance towards this goal.
Check out this blog post from Rav Laitman for more details: https://laitman.com/2014/01/from-perfection-to-perfection/
Albert @ KabU
Greetings
In the course, you say that Kabbalah is a science. I’m curious whether you mean that literally — as in a discipline that follows the scientific method — or more metaphorically, in the sense that it has a systematic internal logic and studies something “objective”.
By science, I mean a method based on empirical observation, testable and falsifiable hypotheses, reproducibility, and objectivity. Scientific results are independent of the researcher’s beliefs or inner experiences or any kind of spiritual state.
Since the broader scientific community doesn’t seem to recognize Kabbalah as a science in this sense, and since many esoteric systems have used scientific language to gain credibility, how can I be sure this isn’t one of those cases? Thanks for your answer.
Hi Blaho,
Kabbalah is a science, like any other science. The main difference is that traditional sciences research life within our egoistic desires, whereas Kabbalah researches life within the desire to bestow.
Check out this blog post from Rav Laitman for more details: https://laitman.com/2011/01/kabbalah-and-other-sciences-philosophy-and-religion/
As for being sure Kabbalah is for you, we learn that “there is no coercion in spirituality” and “one studies only where one’s heart desires”. Meaning that no one can tell you if this is the place for you or not, you have to feel it for yourself.
Albert @ KabU
How do we reconcile the history of Kabbalah presented here with that of academic historians and scholars of Kabbalah like Gershom Scholem and Moshe Idel?
Hi Logan,
I’m not a historian, nor have I studied their work, so I cannot comment on what they teach.
As for what we’re learning here, Kabbalists are practitioners, not historians. Meaning that we’re not interested in dry knowledge, rather we’re interested in learning how to practically reach spirituality. And if we do bring up something from history, it’s for us to learn something about our inner spiritual work.
Check out this blog post from Rav Laitman for more details: https://laitman.com/2023/01/the-real-history-of-the-world/
Albert @ KabU
Why 10 Sefirot and not 9 or 11 ?
Kabbalah explains the cause and effet between the world above and the world below. Kabbalah seems to have no connection with religion, but why are images and allegories found in some Kabbalah writings?
Does Kabbalah speak of what becomes of us after our time on earth? Do we live another live on earth for another experience , or do we pass to another step with an awareness of our experience on earth?
Thank you
Hi Guy,
1. 10 is not an arbitrary number, rather it’s based on the structure of the upper worlds. We’ll learn this structure in great detail in the upcoming lessons.
2. I’m not sure which images or allegories you’re referring to. But in general, Kabbalah is a science. Just like a scientist can draw a graph to help us understand the relationships between certain concepts, likewise in Kabbalah, we occasionally use graphs and charts to help us understand the relationships between certain spiritual concepts. And just like a teacher can draw an allegory to make a certain topic more relatable, likewise in Kabbalah we use allegories to make the concepts more understandable and relatable.
3. Each person has a point in the heart. That is their spiritual potential. If they use this life to fully realize that spiritual potential, then they build out of it a desire called a soul and continue to experience life within that desire. If not, that same spiritual potential will continue to reincarnate again and again until it gets realized.
Check out this blog post from Rav Laitman for more details: https://laitman.com/2015/06/what-happens-to-the-soul-after-death/
Albert @ KabU
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.