- This topic has 1,560 replies, 119 voices, and was last updated 2 hours, 44 minutes ago by
.
- Replies
Dear KabU Instructor.
FAO Seth Breitman.
Dear Seth,
Re. Aug 9, 2022 – Ptiha Lesson 5 | A Sage Speaks
it is said that at Phase 4 the Vessel rejects the entering Light by way of the screen which, in turn, brings about the coupling and the striking as the incoming light hits this screen and is bounced off as rejected light.
It is also said that it is ‘man’s nature to cherish Bestowal and despise Reception’. And, by way of allegory it is said that the Guest may initially reject a Host’s offerings as the Guest initially feels this is Reception. This situation remains until the situation is completely switched where the Guest feels he is doing the Host a favour by receiving what the Host offers thus feeling this is actually an act of Bestowal from the Guest to the Host. But the Guest still could not enjoy the food because of ‘Shame.’ This situation continues until the Guest understands that his accepting of the Host’s offers is indeed a true and honest act of bestowal by the Guest back to the Host. This only happens when the original power of Reception (not the power of hunger nor the ‘Will to Receive’) transmutes and switches position to that of Bestowal by degrees.
Question 1) Have I got the above right-ish in my own words [the host & the guest]?
Question 2) How did Phase 4 ever come to perceive anything other than complete reception for its own self when in this greedy self-centred engrossed way it {Ph. 4] was happy?
Question 3) In the four phases of direct light, Phase 4 is depicted as being 100% reception (-) or completely for its own self, which surely means that it has had no ability to perceive anything other than itself or reception for its own self. Therefore Bestowal depicted as a (+), would never be comprehended by Phase 4 in the first place to start the process of the coupling and the striking?
Question 4) Rather like question 3 above, where does the sense of shame ever come from within Phase 4. If you take it that Phase 4 is complete reception there could not be any shame as complete reception could never feel anything other than the pure unadulterated desire to satiate itself 100%. The idea of shame implies that Phase 4 could not have been complete reception as it could not feel feeling as shame as implies a sense of understanding wrong or foolish action which requires a sense outside that of reception otherwise it would never be perceived.
Question 5) If I understand, the incoming light hits the Screen and brings about the ‘striking and the coupling’ which continues on and on until the new quality (vessel) is created in Phase 4 which completely flips the act of Receiving into one of Bestowal. How could this ever be if the incoming light (+) is rejected and bounced back by the screen then, the Will to Receive (-) would therefore stay in equilibrium and the status quo would prevail: incoming light, hitting screen, bouncing off and the will to receive remaining unaffected and this would perpetuate in-toto and forever without a need for change or possibility for so?
Sorry for being heavy. Thanks ever so much. Lyndon S.
A reply from Seth:
Lyndon,
Hi, good to hear from you again. Hope to see you at the retreat, virtually if not physically.
To your questions:
1) Your answer hits the target, but not a bullseye. You are adding some of your own additions. The most obvious is that the w2r always remains a w2r, it is never a will to bestow. We say things like “will to bestow” or “vessels of bestowal” but the w2r always remains a will to receive. The intention of why he receives is the only thing that changes. He receives in order to bring contentment to the host. Nevertheless, he still has to receive the pleasure, that is the purpose of creation, to receive (kabbalah) the pleasure.2) BHS explains and we went over it a few times, that the light develops the kli by entering it and exiting it. This creates yearning which is an addition to just to desire something. This only happens in phase 4, this is what identifies a developed creature, kli, when it is at phase 4, not before. When the Light leaves, he feels what he is, total reception and what he is standing opposite from, the Creator which is 100% to bestow.
3) In the wisdom of kabbalah we learn like in kindergarten. First the teacher tells us what is. Later we will understand why. So, BHS is telling us what is, that it doesn’t make sense or it seems to contradict or whatever else, so that’s because the wisdom of kabbalah is explaining everything in reality to us. So of course you will need to reach a spiritual perception to truly understand. In the meantime, we are simply learning what is, this is the structure of reality. Later we’ll understand how and why.
4) Lyndon, you are adding too much of your own commentary. BHS is saying that there is a process here where the light cascades down with the vessel as it develops the vessel. The light is what pushes the vessel to develop. There is no such thing as a vessel with it’s own authority. It is developing only and I repeat only according to how the light is developing it. So after malchut of ein sof, the light keeps developing the vessel, the next step is that the vessel feels that it is 100% reception and it is completely opposite in form to the Creator.
5) You are missing pieces of the equation. Why does the kli reject the light? The kli says I will only receive the light that I can recevie with the intention to bestow. So it is not only just to reject but the light that is rejected to that degree, it also to the same degree enters the vessel as inner light. So for example if the screen can reject aviut 0, 1 & 2, then the reflected light clothes on the direct light up to Malchut, Z”A, Bina and inside the vessel the lights of Nefesh, Ruach and Neshama are clothed.
We will review this again tomorrow, Tuesday night Sept 6.Talk soon,
Seth
Hello Lyndon.
Hello Lyndon. I will pass your post on to Seth. Meanwhile it seems to me that two points might shed some light on the matter. One, the shame kabbalists talk about is not like corporeal shame – like when I get caught stealing or somehow embarrass myself in public. We don’t have a way to relate to spiritual shame in this world. Kabbalists call it hell. Second, the will to receive is not flipped, it is permanent and unchanging. However, by the grace of the Creator, we can add an intention to it to where we receive in order to bestow.
Hello,
I recently joined the graduate environment.
Is there any chance to access to the material (PDFs) that was shared during all the past lessons?
Maybe we already have a shared folder for that…
My other question is: how will I be assigned to a Ten?
Thank you
Maria
I have heard on more than one occasion Mother Teresa used as an example of someone who had done good deeds but had only done it to please her own will to receive. How do kabbalists know whether someone else has attained the Creator or not? How do they know she was not acting in a spiritual manner?
Talking about those born in our times, we can draw the Light only from the writings of Baal Hasulam and Rabash. And in them, in an arrangement that we can work with, are included all the other legitimate sources like the Zohar and the Ari. Also, generally speaking, to be tied by root and branch to the Upper World is the very definition of a writing from which it is possible to move closer to that Upper World, through the Reforming Light.
I am trying to depict the qualities attributed to the sefiroth. Having vitality in life, having a sound foundation in life , amidst he turmoil one experiences is that a property of Yesod?
Hi Paul,
It’s important for me to say no, that no attribute that we have, know of, or even dreamed of has anything in common with the qualities of the Sefirot. What we have are desires – but they are all uncorrected. That is, they must go through a process (constituting the whole method of Kabbalah) by which they receive Tzimzum (Restriction), Masach (Screen), and Ohr Hozer (Reflected Light). In this complete inversion of my desire as it is now, we reveal the qualities called Sefirot. Only in the complete inversion of my desires as they are now – and we can’t even imagine what that means yet – do we arrive at such spiritual qualities. Which is why all those books that talk about the qualities of the Sefirot and all the more relating them to human qualities are either mistranslated, or even worse and is often the case, baseless fabrications not written by real Kabbalists.
Q: Why is Zeir Anpin divided by six parts instead of the ordinary five? What is the purpose of Yesod?
A: Zeir Anpin has to be in contact with Malchut, in order to convey the Light to her. For that to happen, he must build a special Sefira to serve as a bridge between Malchut and him, meaning that it will possess similar attributes. For that purpose Zeir Anpin consists of:
Hesed – Keter
Gevura – Hochma
Tifferet – Bina
Netzah – Zeir Anpin of Zeir Anpin
Hod – Malchut of Zeir Anpin
Yesod – the sum total of all the previous Sefirot (like a salad made of five original components that when put together, form a new attribute).
After Yesod comes the collective Malchut – the creature, the soul, the part that must unite with the Creator (Zeir Anpin) through equivalence of form. Malchut is the creature and Zeir Anpin is the Creator. Zeir Anpin is the one to which all prayers to be raised and corrected turn, and he, at the request of Malchut (MAN), builds a bond with her – contact and coupling – through his Sefira of Yesod.
If “all the Kabbalists stopped what they were doing at the time to follow the Ari” (paraphrasing Gianni’s recent YG session), then how come the Hasidic community, who are immersed in so much Kabbalah, as well as the Orthodox community, don’t mention the Ari much? If the Ari was THE Kabbalist… why are these large groups immersed in Kabbalah for generations not really mentioning the Ari? From what I know.
Hi Cameron,
You can find where Baal HaSulam writes this in The Teaching of Kabbalah and its Essence:
“You must understand the reason why all the great sages who followed the Ari abandoned all the books that they compiled in this wisdom and in the commentaries on The Zohar, and nearly prohibited themselves even from being seen, and dedicated their lives to the words of the Ari. This was not because they did not believe in the sanctity of the sages preceding the Ari; God forbid that we should think so. Anyone with eyes in the wisdom could see that the attainment of those great sages in the wisdom of truth was immeasurable. Only an ignorant fool could doubt them. However, their logic in the wisdom followed the first three languages.
Although each language is true and fitting in its place, it is not completely fitting, and quite misleading to understand the wisdom of Kabbalah contained in The Zohar using these orders. This is so because it is a completely different language, since it was forgotten. For this reason, we do not use their explanations, either the explanations of Rabbi Moshe de Leon himself, or his successors’, as their words in interpreting The Zohar are not true, and to this day we have but one commentator—the Ari.
In light of the above, it follows that the internality of the wisdom of Kabbalah is none other than the internality of the Bible, the Talmud, and the legends. The only difference between them is in their explanations.
This is similar to a wisdom that has been translated into four languages. Naturally, the essence of the wisdom has not changed at all by the change of language. All we need to think of is which translation is the most convenient for conveying the wisdom to the student.”
First of all, there are many religious people who greatly respect the Ari. Why there are some groups who don’t emphasize the Ari, and go to great lengths to deemphasize and even obscure Baal HaSulam, I’m not going to comment on even though it’s interesting. “One studies where the heart desires,” and I think that in those groups they study materials that are suitable for those who come there, while everyone more or less knows of Bnei Baruch, what we study, and has the opportunity to come here if they choose.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.