[Logynn]

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?

[Logynn]

It’s easy to love it when you get even a fraction of the image of it.

Thank you so much for all these answers.

[Logynn]

Another one keeps coming to mind. He mentioned that there was a “detaining force” that prevented a vessel from filling before its intention was ready.

If we have an egoistic desire (or a portion that we don’t have the right intention towards) and we are able to sense all the ways it would be a catastrophe to make a movement towards filling it… is that sensation our own judgment/discernment. Or is it a sensation of the detaining force? Or is it “ibur” and it’s just a time to not try to answer your own prayer, and to annul to the upper?

And if it is a sense of the detaining force, do we always get to keep that? Will we always “know” when the desire should be restricted. Or is there a point at which we are alone with it and have to make the calculation without help?

[Logynn]

Thanks

I got a whole heap more questions when I was listening to the recording of Rabash this morning lesson. I hope you don’t mind if I just put them all here:

I know TES is describing a whole partzuf. But is it holographic? All these events also occur in every “part,” like each of us working with the upper on our own desires?

Is the capacity for appreciation the sensing organ for spiritual objects?

Is a “record of coarseness” a “revelation of evil”/an ability to perceive a “transgression”?

Is the light of the record that shines from yesod and animates malchut the “revelation of a portion”?

Is a “spark” a new facet of a “portion” which energizes the vessel to keep working towards the reflected image of the portion?

Is the “alignment” having the friend between you and the Creator, and feeling the light just by knowing that the Creator and yourself are both feeling the Creator is bestowing on the friend, and you feel it as if it’s bestowal on you even though you are technically in the shadow of the friend, holding the friend between yourself and the Creator?

Does malchut leave a vessel and no record (idea) because she’s a desire with no image at the “bottom”? and keter leaves a record (idea) but no vessel at the “top” because its an ideal idea so fine we can’t desire it? And then every sefirot in between is a facet of the interaction between that desire and the idea (keter) revealed in the “portion” (the desire depicted in bestowal) that the partzuf is working with?

Is the screen just the consequence of calculations made regarding the status of the potential reception? The calculations would be made by looking down to feel the status of the desire and looking up (most of the time) to compare it to the record of the portion?

Is the corporeal “body” our interpretation of the “mind” (calculating and perceiving device) the upper gives us to observe all this?

Can we pray for “the power of overcoming”?

[Logynn]

I need help finding a description of a “ringing coin.”

The reference is from Rav’s blog “What Will Replace Money” :

 

“Only if we want to replace it with the next equivalent, what can money be exchanged for, for relationships.

It is when we understand our relationships between one another and share them among each other and the Creator. When the Creator becomes our common equivalent, then all other dimensions will disappear except for real, internal relationships between us. This is called Masach (screen) and Ohr Hozer (reflected light).

This is what we call a coin, “ringing coin,” as they say.”

 

I have been looking at various forms of money and money related concepts. It’s simply fascinating to me how every single one of them points back at the root. But it is rare to find a reference to the form called “coin,” and I want to see more about it since a coin seems the most relevant in terms of sides, orientation, a space between two opposites, etc.

[Logynn]

This question started as a topic in the women’s young groups and it has a lot of subtle implications, so it turned into a lot more questions. Initially it came up that in a Russian language lesson there was an instruction that women need to have children. I can’t quote the instruction to clarify, because I haven’t seen the Russian lesson. But the friend has a question that’s important to her about the specific responsibility (especially of women) to have children in corporeal life.

Another friend had a thought that the Creator might have a specific task or role in life, so there is no set instruction or advice for corporeal life because of this. In my case I am autistic and I wouldn’t be even remotely fit to parent until I was older than the biological age to do so. This seems to align with this friend’s thought. Also, some men cannot marry for different reasons.

I recall when I studied here around 2008 that the advice was very different than it is now regarding everything for men and women in corporeal life. Now that I am back here it seems like BB observes the changes in the collective and quite intentionally adjusts to it. Just like there was a rule to hide Kabbalah, and then later the rule changed, and it was only because it was time for it to change. Do you think advice about marriage and children will also evolve over time?

I am also curious regarding other ways of supporting children. The dissemination materials I am interested in making would be for children. I recall you mentioned you teach children in your work.

So, the question is, what is the responsibility of the individual man or woman to have their own children?
And also, what is the responsibility of the individual man or woman towards children collectively, including the ones they are not related to?

[Author]

Replies