- This topic has 2,513 replies, 143 voices, and was last updated 1 day, 15 hours ago by
.
- Replies
Entangled particles are reacting similarly no matter of their distance and consciousness, this is what they say in new science. Is it always similarity or can it be also oppositeness according to Kabbalah? That they react contrary to one another?
And is it possible, that souls do the work at the place of other souls? And if yes, where can this be seen in the process described in Pticha?
Ptchia doesn’t talk about us, our process to return to the spiritual state, but about the spiritual world itself. It barely mentions Adam HaRishon.
We’re after its breaking. We all affect each other now, across time and space. We don’t have to be in equivalence of form. We’re in egoistic compatibility and therefore we’re in this world together and we’re all connected in an egoistic system.
Hi Gianni,
a few days ago I had a discussion with you on the logic of rules in the spirituality appear to be crystal clear but the corporeal life rules are fuzzy. I probably didn’t explain well why I think it’s fuzzy. of course there are some rules, such as when you are sick go see a doctor etc, which are clear, but how to love your families/friends and other people is the area that’s very fuzzy to me. so my question is, once you start the spiritual journey, in the Ten to learn about how to love your friends without expecting anything back, what’s the purpose for corporeal life? other than to keep you alive to do the spiritual work? what’s purpose of all sort of relationships/hardships in corporeal life? other than to continue to reveal my will to receive but not able to change anything? will what’s fuzzy now (in how to navigate corporeal life) become more clear as well?
thanks
Helen
It’s all purposeful. It’s that the whole correction stands before us. And some parts, it’s not clear how to correct them. They can’t be corrected before the correction in the ten. For now, their correction is that we don’t give to them and don’t receive from them. We exist and flow with them when we must, and that’s it. We’d like to do more? It will be uncorrected actions that bring no benefit.
We’re taught – not only in Kabbalah but also through the new science lately – that the others are oneself whom we don’t know yet or perceive. Sometimes we’re in tens together with friends whose qualities are so different of ourselves, that we only can wonder ‘how is this me!?’, and there is no cultural cluster within our whole kli, where are no challenges and even brutalities in tens. So: can it be that one gets a ten whose members are really not what oneself is, not even in the opposite form, and can it not be taken like this? That the friends are simply everything what one can never be, and THATS WHY one gets them, and is about to find a place above this condition in order to be anyway together like one, for the sake of the connection? Why should we torment and mutilate ourselves by thinking ‘this is me’ if it is not? Why do we have to consider them ‘oneself’? I feel I didn’t express it well enough and hope you understand what I mean. Why do we not stop tormenting ourselves with qualities which we are not containing pretending they are ours? And simply accept the difference already at the beginning without identifying it first as being ourselves?
Let it be that way, then. “They are not me. They are the opposite of me, precisely the parts that have nothing to do with me. That’s why I have to connect specifically with them: because the Creator is revealed in a relation called ‘love the OTHER as yourself.’ That’s why He brought me them as friends, because only with them can that other truly be called an other. And if I will come to love them, I’ll truly give the Creator contentment.”
Hi Gianni
Please help to put below terms in context, how they are related to each other and/or how they are different. also, is it important for me to recognize what quality/state I am in and why?
Ascend & Descend
Right line & left Line
Righteous & Wicked
Shechina in the dustthanks
Helen
Ascent: increase in the importance of spirituality
Descent: decrease in the importance of spirituality
Righteous: one who justifies all the Creator’s behaviors, and goes joyfully toward bestowal
Wicked: one who curses the Creator, or goes knowingly toward reception
Shechina in the dust: when the Creator or the group is unimportant
what about right and line, are they the same as righteous and wicked? , and how all of those states interconnect with each other? for example, during descent, do I also tend to wicked and leave Shechina in the dust. are they causes and effects relationship or not necessarily? are they all sent from the Creator? but we read an article about Wicked and Righteous is up to us. I guess I want to understand the inner connection of all those state and where I put my emphasis on.
thanks Gianni
I can’t answer how things interconnect because between things there can be countless relationships.
During a descent, you could tend to wicked or to righteous.
All comes from the Creator, however “he did not say ‘wicked’ or ‘righteous'” because in a descent or ascent you can become wicked or righteous. It depends what your direction is, out of the state the Creator gave.
I find myself trapped in “not able to justify the Creator” sometimes, especially seeing loved one suffering. I know it’s my will to receive, as it hurts me, as I have no solutions for their suffering. I know this is the time for faith above reason, but that’s on intellectual level, as I do not feel it. based on what I am learning, this is the time for true prayer, but I do not know what to pray for other than” please correct me”. I think that prayer is on intellectual level as well. it doesn’t seem like I am in a descend, as to pursue spiritually has been important to me. so probably I am wicked…but I do not know how to get out of this wicked state. I feel very sad to be a wicked one.
I don’t really know what that state is like, how can I behave as if I am in? all I can imagine is in that state, I will feel joy I have never felt and I will only think of the Creator and how to bring him joy.. but I do not have it, I don’t know what it means to behave like it, as I feel no joy and I do NOT think of the creator, nor do I know how to bring him joy as he is hidden from me. I am in complete darkness.
Then, start with a part of the picture: There is None Else Besides Him. And when you are somewhat in that, add that He is also good and doing good. Whatever is dark, it’s because my Will to Receive doesn’t want to come closer to bestowal; the darkness is happening only to it. Atop the darkness, I can be in joy. I feel all the bad feelings in my uncorrected body (desire). What would I feel in my corrected body? This is in the direction of Faith Above Reason, that you do everything as if in a state of ascent.
There was another recording in the lesson this morning and it came with another heap of questions:
Does diminution occur because the initial state of the desire is so turbulent and monstrous with egoistic need that it needs at least one impression of the upper in order to be fit to begin work?
Does the ascending and descending light “clash” because malchut’s idea of what to do with the desire conflicts with the upper image of using the desire in bestowal? And subsequent clashes are the lower one slowly getting on the same page as the upper regarding the intention that desire should be used for?
Can a striking take the form of a “revelation of a portion,” which would be the image of using that desire in bestowal, depicted in the reflected light so the lower can aim at it to hone in on the intention? Is that also what a “record of clothing” is?
Is the striking specifically to raise surrounding light so that the lower one can work with its attitude towards the reflected image (record) of bestowal, and not an attempt to enter the vessel at all?
When Malchut is in Bina does it mean that all of Malchut’s desires have been moved from the will to receive to the intention to bestow? Are we moving desires from Malchut to Bina like a baby playing with a shape sorting toy?
Does the striking (and sparks) have to repeat because the klipot “eat” each impression, so it has to be renewed along the way? The sparks go out because of the klipot?
If Keter is at the “top”, and that’s why nothing could fall from above and strike it to form a vessel… then how did anything “fall” from AB into Keter to give it coarseness?
If some vessels are never ever refined of their coarseness, are they still able to be used to bestow at some point purely through devotion and annulment? That even without the ability to overcome that falling in love with the upper one could just flip the intention?
Are “twenty sefirot” of direct and reflected light inverted in relation to each other, like a reflection. Or they are stacked like two degrees?
Does diminution occur because the initial state of the desire is so turbulent and monstrous with egoistic need that it needs at least one impression of the upper in order to be fit to begin work?
I don’t have the context, so I can’t say.
Does the ascending and descending light “clash” because malchut’s idea of what to do with the desire conflicts with the upper image of using the desire in bestowal? And subsequent clashes are the lower one slowly getting on the same page as the upper regarding the intention that desire should be used for?
It’s not a sort of ethical dilemma. Malchut will receive in order to receive. And yet the Light continues pressuring her to receive.
Can a striking take the form of a “revelation of a portion,” which would be the image of using that desire in bestowal, depicted in the reflected light so the lower can aim at it to hone in on the intention? Is that also what a “record of clothing” is?
I haven’t heard Baal HaSulam or Ari use the term “revelation of a portion” so I don’t know exactly what it is. I also don’t know what is “the image of using that desire in bestowal.”
Is the striking specifically to raise surrounding light so that the lower one can work with its attitude towards the reflected image (record) of bestowal, and not an attempt to enter the vessel at all?
Again, I didn’t find a “reflected image of bestowal” anywhere in the text, so I don’t know what it is.
When Malchut is in Bina does it mean that all of Malchut’s desires have been moved from the will to receive to the intention to bestow? Are we moving desires from Malchut to Bina like a baby playing with a shape sorting toy?
There is a technical term, Malchut in Bina, and I don’t know if that’s what you mean. If so, it doesn’t mean that all its desires are to bestow. It still depends in what relation to Bina’s qualities are the qualities of Malchut. If you ask about Malchut rising to Bina, then that is a state where Malchut becomes like Bina, at least by way of Restricting her qualities.
Does the striking (and sparks) have to repeat because the klipot “eat” each impression, so it has to be renewed along the way? The sparks go out because of the klipot?
When there is a Striking, there are sparks. And these sparks, supposedly the Klipot can enjoy. Period. He doesn’t elaborate much on the sparks beyond this.
If Keter is at the “top”, and that’s why nothing could fall from above and strike it to form a vessel… then how did anything “fall” from AB into Keter to give it coarseness?
I don’t know of an action like that. A new Partzuf is formed by a Zivug de’ Hakaa, with ten complete sefirot.
If some vessels are never ever refined of their coarseness, are they still able to be used to bestow at some point purely through devotion and annulment? That even without the ability to overcome that falling in love with the upper one could just flip the intention?
All get corrected. But some await the correction of other vessels first. In the meantime, my correction is to be annulled. Later, I’ll get my turn for a more fundamental correction, to receive in order to bestow. However, there are some vessels, the vessels called Lev HaEven [stony heart] that we don’t know how they will be corrected. Only the Light of the end of correction [Rav Pa’alei U’Mekabtzi’el] can come and correct them.
Are “twenty sefirot” of direct and reflected light inverted in relation to each other, like a reflection. Or they are stacked like two degrees?
Inverted [such that Malchut from Above down corresponds to the Keter from below upward.
Thank you, Gianni. This is helpful.
I am half way through Young Group. So I have been focused on the Social Writings. That’s my context for everything right now. And it is maybe an odd lens to approach this in. But I am excited that these recordings about TES are so vivid to me anyhow. It is unexpected.
Clearly it is all connecting somehow through the efforts of my Ten.
I appreciate all your efforts here. Thanks again.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.