Forum Replies Created
- Replies
Concerning the scrutiny of a discernment if it is of Kedusha or of Klipa in Shamati 58 is written:
“(…) the scrutiny is in the reason. In Kedusha, there is reason, and in the Sitra Achra there is no reason, since another god is sterile and does not bear fruit.”
I understood that the reason, meaning doubt and intention to receive for self, comes from Sitra Achra and is about to go above it choosing faith – then the state is pure, Kedusha – meaning choosing ‘no-reason’. So how can reason be in Kedusha? And do we actually aim the state of Sitra Achra being in faith that it is the state of Kedusha?
Or does it mean that the reason in Kedusha is a real one and the reason in Sitra Achra is not real, so thats why it’s called ‘no reason’?
(I can’t believe) I have to ask even what is reason!?
Can we say in other words that our part in the work is to discover, feel and admit/accept the Aviut of the will to receive and to transpone it into the intention in-order-to-bestow? Is this our work? This transposition of coerceness into the right intention?
1. Is it possible to do the work of correction at the place of another person and she will get/integrate the results of the correction work? if the person is not on the path (corporeal person, but close) and she and her deeds/interactions are part of one’s reshimo?
2. Are there souls who descend in this world and are like delegates working for others, and can in turn delegate the correction results?
Thank you
And when we say “I don’t receive anything more” – what is ment by this? Because then we wouldn’t attend any lesson or meetings with friends, because we would receive. To connect means – also – to receive, is an aspect of connecting. I hear smth and can’t make it unheard, I received it.
When it comes to connection there is the matter of receiving – receiving the other one, and for that openess is needed – which is actually the “giving” – and the intention to receive the other one – otherwise connection cannot be made (side-question: this would be receiving in order to receive connection!? This discernment comes first now writing, was not my intention, but the way is put says also that receiving is the bestowal – this is it, right?)
The (many) intended question(s): How can Keter (GE) from the lower one actually receive at all if it is pure bestowal? The connection between GE of the lower one and AHP of the higher one can be made only if GE receives in order to bestow? What process has the GE or Keter to be gone through so that it can receive? Does Keter contain Malchut, which would enable Keter to receive? And which is the “giving” of Malchut of AHP? The desire/intention for connection? This would mean that the Malchut is corrected in this case, but AHP means per se that it is uncorrected – or not? Is such desire/intention an act of bestowal?
And if Keter/ GE would feel shame – then it won’t be a true Keter/GE, right? That means that “in order to bestow” is stable there, incorporated?
This came up on basis of Shamati 17 yesterday and couldn’t ask completely. Thank you
