Forum Replies Created

Viewing 6 replies - 25 through 30 (of 210 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • in reply to: Ask Anything #494360
    Helen
    Participant

    I understand more effort creates greater lack, but that lack still feels like it would only produce a mind level, ego driven prayer , such as: I wish I had this desire because it would make things easier…

    how will that transform into a heartfelt prayer? Is it that by continuing the effort regardless, the light gradually works on me until the desire becomes more sincere and heartfelt on its own? I only need to worry about doing it and also it’s okay to have the ego driven prayer to start with?

    in reply to: Ask Anything #494115
    Helen
    Participant

    Hi Gianni

    in reference to below article. my question is: I totally see the lack of my capability to bestow, but I wonder how will that transition me to the lack of desire of bestow? it’s like I don’t like shrimp, I am asked to like the shrimp and I tried many times, all I can conclude is that I lack the capability and desire to like shrimp, nor do I have the capability to change my desire. why would this lack cause me to want to pray to have the desire for shrimp?

    kabbalahmedia.info/en/sources/vK4btTLv

     

    in reply to: Ask Anything #494102
    Helen
    Participant

    and the 125 steps will bring us back to the beginning of the world of Adam Kadmon correct? but that’s not even the correct stage, it’s only Mulchut?

    in reply to: Ask Anything #494035
    Helen
    Participant

    then what is that state where there was Equivalence of Form between the Light and the desire?

    in reply to: Ask Anything #493484
    Helen
    Participant

    is it correct that there are 4 phases in Eye Sof, and the stage 3 is somewhat close to equivalence of form but the Kli is only receiving partial light.  is phase 3 the stage you are referring to?

    in reply to: Ask Anything #493466
    Helen
    Participant

    Hi Gianni

    In the Introduction to the Zohar, the first few pages uses the stone/mountain analogy to say the soul is ‘part’ of the Creator, implying they share the same substance. but it also states that the soul’s entire substance is the will to receive, and that this quality is completely absent in the Creator. If the soul and the Creator are opposite in their very substance, how does the stone&mountain analogy hold?

    thanks

    Helen

Viewing 6 replies - 25 through 30 (of 210 total)