- This topic has 170 replies, 65 voices, and was last updated 5 days, 18 hours ago by
.
- Replies
Hi Gianni, a basic question I am thinking now, can we say that once the kli is “thought of” by the Creator, it is already an ego? Because it seems that the kli/desire to be like the Creator signifies that it is already separated. Then it tries to empty itself in the light of Ohr Hassidim (Bina), which I feel like the kli’s feeling is also the a type of light that is just a different perspective from the same light in Keter. Then it realizes that the light in Keter do not feel fulfilled by being deflected completely, thus it receives some of it (ZA) but still maintaining the deflection of the light like in Bina because it still believes in the light of Ohr Hassidim. Then finally the kli realizes that to fulfil the purpose of the light, it must play the part why it was created, which is to receive the light completely, and by doing so it gives pleasure to the Creator, Creation as a whole.
I don’t actually know what I wanted to ask, but I am trying to get the whole picture hoping to understand why this analogy and how this analogy should be understood properly. Your input is highly appreciated.
Hi Charles,
I’m inclined to say, keep thinking about it. It’s not quite correct, but it’s coming together. We are always thought of by the Creator. We don’t think about the Creator, and that’s the problem. In fact, egoism is what can take place while we don’t think of the Creator properly. While were we able to think about the Creator properly, consistently, egoism would cease to exist.
When these are describing what happens to the Light when the screen is repelling it, it reminds me of the parts of the Zohar where it’s talking about “painting colors” and the “fountain.” Are those talking about the same thing? It’s just basically Light splattering on the screen, and it doesn’t just disappear if it’s not received into the vessel?
I hope that’s not a dumb question. I’m not trying to create a mental picture. I’m just trying to figure out which metaphors are correlated with each other in the different books and articles, because I know they are just trying every which way to describe the same thing.
This, we can never know, from our degree, but only by rising to the degree of the authors of the Zohar. Even if we translate a word, the next word we don’t know what degree it speaks of, and thus how to translate. The Zohar is not a study text, but one that we study only as a segula [remedy] that we study for the Reforming Light. How a remedy works, we don’t know; but apparently the doctor knows. That’s all I need to know.
Hi Gianni: since phase 4 is “double” receiving, and we are not even there yet… this is a bit scary, does that mean we need to coming even worse than our current level of  receiving desires,  it gets worse before it gets better? am I gonna turn into a giant greedy person? what will I be greedy for? every types of desires? I already notice myself to desire more love from my families and friends(I find myself care for them more at the same time), it’s a very vulnerable state! thanks as always!
Regarding the last video in this digital order: are we – people and desires to receive – actually descending or ascending? And regarding phase 4 – does it mean that for example when we take off the body, or as we achieve that state of Malchut, we are both in one? Malchut and Keter?
Thanks so much  for answering all these questions… it’s really helpful!!! I find all this quite overwhelming…and I am still wondering about why a desire is called a desire- not in terms of the word meaning , but in terms of its energy… is it called a desire because it’s a form of let’s say an energy with direction to fulfillment? So there’s no deviation of its direction and purpose? Like it HAS to come to fulfillment?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.