During the last seven years or so I already wrote two articles about God, each coming from a different viewpoint. I also gave a comment about this subject to Joshua’s article What is God to you? of May 6th, 2018, which approached the subject from another viewpoint again, but not all comments are read, let alone remembered, by everyone. That is why I decided to quote it in this article, with a few small additions.
“I believe that there is no one definition to define God. If I had to choose a word it would be Everything. There just is not anything that is not God manifesting on one of the multitudinous vibrationary frequencies. In the lowest frequencies that would be without much, if any, conscious awareness, but still a manifestation of God. We cannot get away from God however we might try as we are a part of God. In our case with a very much diminished awareness as we put on a blindfold so to speak before we entered into this physical body in order to have certain experiences.
What fun is playing a game if you know all the best possibilities and the answers to all the questions already? The fun is in finding out and inventing new possibilities for ourselves. We do have all the potentials of God in us, even though they have not all been activated yet.
I think you can see us (humans, animals, plants, minerals, cells, atoms, quanta, planets, stars, galaxies, universes a.s.o.) as points of focus of attention for God. Each of us is a cell or an atom in a greater universe and is a universe to smaller entities. God as the highest entity of all is encompassing all of us and perceiving and experiencing through us. As we are experiencing through our organs and cells and atoms and maybe are ‘god’ to them.
There is no God that is separate from us but when you consider us to be the focal points in the feet of God (using the metaphor of a human body), as we live in the lowest and densest frequency vibrations, and the focal point that encompasses all is the brain, you can also imagine communication between the feet and the brain in order to make them function.
So while there is no God outside us because we are in God and God is in us, we still may want to experience communication and therefore pretend that God is outside of us.
The fact is that we cannot possibly understand how things are in Reality with a capital R as long as we are still wearing this blindfold. We are waking up though because we are now at least aware of the fact that we are wearing a blindfold and that this world is nothing but an illusion.
So maybe we should stop arguing about what really happened in whatever time and whatever place, because none of that is real anyway, except the Love and Conscious Awareness we gained from whatever happened in the world we created.”
………………………………………………
Today I want to focus first and foremost on the unconditional love and unity of God, which I also already mentioned many times in my articles and comments but which was explained so much more beautifully and completely by rabbi Zvi Ish-Shalom in the video of which you find the link here, and which I advise you to watch first, before reading the rest of this article:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eudhz0ylnW4
Personally I enjoyed this video very much, not only because it addressed so many things that I knew already, and had actually written about often as well because Hebrew numerology is at the basis of almost all my articles, but because there were so many new aspects as well.
I did not discover this meaning of the Name YHWH because of any Bible texts in the way Zvi described but very prosaically by just doing the math. The fact that the numerical value of YHWH, 26, equals 13 + 13 (echad + ahava) was immediately obvious to me, maybe because thirteen has always been my favorite number since I had a Near Death experience at the age of thirteen, in which I experienced this unconditional love myself. A love of a frequency that is far too high to be experienced as long as we still reside in our physical bodies. That is why I made this theme to the centre of attention of many of my articles.
Slowly it started to occur to me though that this principle is not only the Name of God, and the nature of His /Her/ It’s being but also of ours as we (everything from quarks to universes and beyond), is an expression of God’s being. God is experiencing Himself (to keep it short) through all of us, as we are all sparks of the Fire that is God, another Name, who temporarily descended into the so-called world of matter (which is described as a dream or deep sleep, tardema, in Genesis) in order to gain conscious awareness there by also experiencing the opposite of light, of love etc. in order to learn in this way what these and all other concepts really mean. All this has taken us a very long ‘time’ (within the concept of space and time), and many lives (within the concept of reincarnation) in order to come to the point where we finally recognize this process for what it is, and the fact that the essence of God is in effect our essence also.
………………………………………
So our task in this life on earth and in duality is to learn to express this essence of our being, this unconditional love and also this unity (in diversity) in our own daily lives.
It means also to recognize and acknowledge that all major world religions in their essence are all about the same thing: unconditional love and unity in diversity, and that there is no one religion that solely is in possession of the truth whereas all others somehow got it wrong. And it means that we will have to cooperate with each other to reach this goal together. In a practical sense of course by practicing this unconditional love wherever we can. And by discarding automatic distrust of everyone who looks differently, or is of another race, country or religion, in order to reach this unity in diversity together.
…………………………………………..
I am not going to explain every detail of Zvi’s video – he did that better than I ever could – but I do want to focus on one or two of the details.
Elohim, numerical value 86, equals ha teva, (the) nature, with also a numerical value of 86. The formless is the form. Spirit, the formless, has another, higher, vibrational frequency than matter, the form. So by entering the ‘mater’ial world in order to have experiences there in the form of all (life) forms in it God is lowering His vibration.
Mater is the Latin word for mother, so matter is mother stuff. Our material world is the feminine / mother side of God, and therefore Goddess or Divine Mother, of which we in our incarnated self are a part. So if you want to see God: look in the mirror, and remember with what purpose you came to this world: to bring unconditional love and unity in diversity back to her, as that is the phase we now have reached in our cycle of development.
The title of this article is the Nature of God, and of course I meant something like the essence of God with this term. But nature as ha teva, in the literal sense now proves to be also an aspect, a side, of God. And what a beautiful aspect it is.
With the term ha teva I was immediately reminded of Haganat ha teva, the society for the protection of nature in Israel, which used to organize all sorts of beautiful trips into nature during the time that I lived there during the last century. Maybe they still do. I was also reminded again of the beautiful flowers in spring, and the beauty of the deserts – the Negev, where my husband used to live for a few years before we met, and the Sinai – among other things. There nature shows itself in a most majestic way and can really be experienced as divine. Of course the Sinai belongs to Egypt again these days but when I lived in Israel it still belonged to Israel and it was not yet spoilt with asphalt roads and tourist accommodations, as so many areas of nature are these days. I went there for an eight-day trip with a group of people from our village, under the guidance of Haganat ha teva, in May 1973 and never forgot the experience. I did get some understanding for the grumbling of the people of Israel who had to track through it for forty years though. I would probably have started to grumble much sooner than they did for beautiful though the desert may be, it is also barren and not for the life of me would I have wanted to wander through there for such a long time.
Mother Nature (God) shows both a beautiful and majestic side and a grim one in regions like deserts and mountains and (stormy) seas but also a soft and loving one in flowers, budding and flowering trees and young living beings and the like. The nature of the Mother really is awe-inspiring and inviting unconditional love.
………………………………………..
My desert experience in 1973 was awe-inspiring but so was the experience of the Yom Kippur war half a year later. As our Christian village had been started in order for Christians to be solidary with the Jewish people after almost 2000 years of discrimination, persecution and murder of Jews by Christians, this village was intentioned to be non-missionary and the purpose originally was just to assist the – in the beginning still young – state of Israel by getting to know the people – all the peoples – and by starting and assisting enterprises that would support the economy. We would have to learn to listen to the Jews for a change instead of foisting our religious views upon them. It also meant to be solidary with the Jewish people in the case of an attack by other countries. So running away was not an option when this war suddenly came upon us. This placed us in a very special position in which we had to adjust to the situation as it was – we were very near the northern front – and somehow that put us in some sort of bubble in which we lost all fear and experienced the Presence of God very clearly in a way I cannot really describe. It was definitely Love.
There were miracles too, one of which I already mentioned in my article about miracles, but here is another one. Of course we were very much focused on the news and I remember one occasion where I was listening very intently to the radio in order to find out where the attacking forces were exactly, and taking it all in, until I suddenly realized that I was listening to a Hebrew broadcast, and I did not know any Hebrew to speak of yet. Up till then there had been no time to attend any Hebrew classes as there was too much work to be done. As soon as I realized that the broadcast was all in Hebrew, it became unintelligible to me. Sort of like Peter sinking into the water of the Lake of Tiberias as soon as he realized what he was doing by stepping out of the boat in order to walk to Jesus over the water.
Another aspect of that war was the fact that it had meant so much to the people around us that all of us had stayed with them during that war, as one of the survivors of the concentration camps of the Second World War told us when we visited them later after the war. We had not been able to do anything at all to help anybody during that time but purely the fact that we were there had been of some comfort to them. It gave them a feeling of not being deserted by everyone in their hour of greatest danger again.
Something comparable happened many years later in Vietnam, in 2008, when we were there to celebrate the wedding of our second son to a Vietnamese girl. One of the uncles of my daughter in law had been with the Vietcong during the Vietnam war and had been terribly wounded; he had lost an arm and an eye during that time and had many internal wounds as well. Of course this had a great impact on his attitude towards people coming from western countries. Since the end of that war in 1975, when my son was not even born yet, he had refused to meet any person from the west but now he was more or less forced to meet with us. He took a seat at the table right across from our seats and immediately wanted to know what we thought about the fact that our son had just married a Vietnamese girl. He obviously expected that we would not really welcome a Vietnamese daughter in law but was pleasantly surprised that we did not show any objections to the marriage. And then he pointed at our youngest son, who sat beside us, and asked what we would think of it when he too would want to marry a Vietnamese girl (and indeed, in the few days we had been in Vietnam he had already managed to fall in love with one and he is married to her now!). We told him that that would be perfectly fine with us and with that statement a huge weight of distrust and maybe even hatred seemed to fall off him and he became a changed person, totally accepting us. We did not do anything, we only were there in a positive state of being and that made all the difference.
Being is the essence of what it is all about, being unconditional love and being willing to be part of a unity in diversity.
………………………………………….
This interlude about the second meaning of the nature of God and what followed sort of interrupted my explanation about the term Elohim but there is a second form of Elohim, which Zvi did not mention within the context of his presentation.
The first form of Elohim means God – or really Gods because it is a plural form – but these Gods are a unity and act as one, which becomes clear in the form of the verbs which are used, that is, the singular form. We find that to begin with in the creation story where already in the first sentence it is written Bereshit bara Elohim et ha shamayim we et ha arets: In the beginning created Elohim the heavens and the earth. The verb created, bara, is singular. And so are the verbs used in the following verses.
However, there are also other Elohim; gods which are idols. They each point in a different way and they create chaos instead of order, hatred instead of love. In their case an accompanying verb is in plural, which I have however never seen explained anywhere by anyone.
An example of these idols can be found in the time that the people of Israel are asking Aaron to make gods for them in order to lead them to the Promised Land because Moses took a long time to return to the people from the top of the mountain where he received the Ten Words from God. In Exodus 32:1 it is written: Ase lanu Elohim asher yeelchu lefanenu, Make gods for us that will go before us.
In that sentence the plural form yeelchu – they will go – was used, so they really asked for gods who would lead them back to slavery because that is the only destination such gods can lead us to.
That is also a lesson for us because the reason why the people asked for such gods must have been that they did not have enough trust in the God who had delivered them from Mitsrayim, the world of duality, the world of slavery. They had not expected that the journey to a Promised Land would be a journey through a desert, through challenges and uncertainties, a journey during which they would have to learn to take decisions themselves again, and to face an uncertain future for the time being. They had not expected that the journey would take a long time, ‘forty’ years. Forty is the character Mem, which as a word means mayim, water, and as such also is a symbol for ego and emotions. They would have to learn to deal with all that in the desert during those ‘forty’ years.
……………………………………..
Doesn’t that sound familiar to us in the circumstances we are in now? It has been more than clear that the actions of humanity have taken the earth to the cutting edge of where she can go and now we face a very uncertain future if we do not turn around immediately and start behaving in a very different fashion, towards the earth, towards all creatures that inhabit the earth and also towards ourselves so that we finally will be able to face a future again in which unconditional love reigns over all and where we all will have become a unity in diversity which lives together as one and which expresses all the qualities of the God we could never find when we were looking in all the wrong places and going into all the wrong directions.
This journey may lead us over difficult roads, which at times seem unsurmountable. But we have to go this road if we want to reach the Promised Land, Kana’an, which has the numerical value of 190, whereas the numerical value of Egypt, Mitsrayim, the land of slavery, is 380. Symbolically this translates as the Promised Land being the world of oneness, of unity in diversity, as opposed to the slavery of Egypt in the world of duality.
The way out of this world of slavery and through the desert of uncertainty is shown to us by Jesus. No, not the person who was born some 2000 years ago, who came to deliver us from our sins, who was The Son of God. That has become the doctrine of Christianity, a faulty doctrine in my view. I believe that Jesus was and is A Son of God and at that time came to show us that we are as well. He came to show us the way how to accomplish what he accomplished.
Jesus in the Bible is a symbol and a process; a way back to unconditional love and unity in diversity and a road which we will have to go ourselves. Nobody else can do it for us. Jesus the person may have been the one who came to show all of us this way. A way which has nothing to do with Christianity or any other religion as such, although of course the followers of each of those religions are invited to walk this road as well.
The Hebrew name of Jesus is Yeshua, and yeshua is a word as well. It means help, rescue, salvation. Our way to salvation is the way of the cross, the crucifixion of the ego and the birth of the Christ Consciousness after that, which I described extensively in the articles in the links below:
http://www.spiritofthescripture.com/id3124-an-esoteric-interpretation-of-the-crucifixion-of-jesus.html
http://www.spiritofthescripture.com/id3450-the-birth-of-the-christ.html
The Crucifixion of the Ego
There remains one other image of God to explain and that image is that of God as the Father. My view on that can be found in my article The Other Son , which shows God as an unconditionally loving Father who accepts all His children in all of their diversity.
……………………………
For those of you who want to get a complete overview of how I have come to view the concept of God I provide you here with the links to the two previous articles I wrote about this concept.
Does God exist? Is there consciousness outside of the body, or life after death?
What if the purpose of Creation is the Evolution of God?
……………………………….
I invite each of you to seriously consider what I presented you with in all this material and to comment on it if you feel like that. I hope to be able to reply to your comments but the fact of the matter – and the reason why I have not been writing any articles at all during the last eighteen (18! The number of chai, life) months is that I have been and still am ill, and that writing anything at all takes a lot of energy, of which I still have preciously little these days. Besides that my eldest son has been diagnosed with incurable cancer in 2018 and our youngest suddenly became ill a few days ago with symptoms that may point to the corona virus. Today he was finally tested but the result of the test he will not get for another two days. His wife is having a very difficult pregnancy and is not able to do anything herself most of the time. Our grandson has immediately been put into quarantine again and spends a lot of the time at our house, while my husband is helping out at theirs as well. So when my son will prove to be infected, my husband and I will probably be as well. And what that means to me in my condition is anyone’s guess. But it certainly made me go much deeper in writing this article.
The need of the present circumstances of the world during this hectic period and our own condition suddenly urged me to write this article and gave me the inspiration and the strength for it as it obviously is something we have to become aware of right now.
I hope to be able to reply to your comments but I cannot guarantee that I will be physically up to it so if you do not hear from me, you now know the reason.
Unconditional love and unity in diversity really is the centre that everything revolves around. It is the nature of God. It is the task for all of us. And it is the essence of our being. Jesus already told us so when he told us that we are gods.
Thank you, Anny, for the great post. First off I would like to say that that was indeed a great video link in your article and the speaker extrapolated so many pertinent points about Deuteronomy 6:4. Anyone reading this article who has not clinked on that link should if you are interested in getting a great revelation about what we call God is both form and not form, and how they are linked. I learned quite a lot through his presentation!
Now to your article:
Yes, God is in all, and in everything. You have showed this very well in the past with your articles about involution and evolution. Two scriptures I wanted to add to also back up your point:
Galatians 4:26: “Jerusalem which is above is free, and is the mother of us all.”
Matter is the eternal receptive cosmic womb which receives spirit and therefore the impregnation of greater consciousness as it experiences itself. In the scripture above the mother that is “above” and “free” refers to the Buddhic function (not to be confused with Buddha), but is direct experience of the Holy Spirit. In modern terminology it is intuition which is freely given to all consciousness that follows the still quiet voice within, and learns to trust and rely upon it. It births the Christ within, and manifest itself as wisdom, which as you know is feminine in the Old Testament, indeed the free mother of us all, aiding the intellect to discern the truth of higher realities. The correlation with matter (and as you pointed out mater / mother) is that matter, in all forms, is the womb where consciousness operates through it’s many vehicles, sheaths, bodies, etc. Eve is the mother of all living because in a symbolic sense, is the beginning of consciousness in the lower nature of human form operating on the dense plane of physical matter after her and Adam are expelled (symbolically) from Eden, Eden being that state of mind before physical incarnation (albeit without awareness of opposites).
The other scripture I wanted to point out is in Ezekiel 23:2: “Son of man, there were two women, the daughters of one mother.”
Daughters in scripture symbolize lower emotions from the mind united with desire. The one mother here still signifies the cosmic womb which produces sons and daughters (thoughts and emotion) in the physical experience. But the one mother is also that process which allows for the raising of the thoughts and emotions and transforms spirit expressing as the desire mind to the mind of unity, wisdom, and love. Of course the masculine spirit is needed to complete the process.
And as you also brilliantly pointed out, the paradox here is that even matter is not real. By not real I don’t mean consciousness does not experience it (because we are here reading this in limited form) but rather is it ultimately illusory because it is transient and changes, always in motion and changing life guided by spirit. It serves it’s purpose as the playground (as you call it) and the discovery of consciousness itself by perceiving opposites.
Put another way, and referring back to Paul’s writing in Galatians, the Jerusalem below is the one of bondage, being matter of high density and lowest vibration. But the Jerusalem above is that which is freed from this matter of low virbation. This is the true meaning of Hagar and Sarah in Paul’s esoteric symbols. Not that matter is evil or bad, in fact as you point out it is the necessary playground which eventually allows for the process of being eventually freed from its higher density. So all around matter is divine and filled with God all the way through. The process of going from lower Jerusalem (physical life) to upper Jerusalem / third heaven (consciousness freed from physical bondage, a.k.a the incorruptable) is simply the mind (Adam) going from being the first Adam (consciousness experienced through the desire mind by Eve’s being tempted of the serpent) to becoming the second Adam / Christ (consciousness elevated and experienced through unity and love), the spiritual mind. The first Adam is a physical Adam, with latent potential of elevated consciousness that is yet to be realized. The second Adam is that potential fully manifested and realized!
And this entire process is summed up in the video you led us all to in your link. God is the formless and the form, the nature and the spirit. God is simply this: the all encompassing EXPERIENCE of consciousness in involution and evolution, down from the lowest vibration to the highest! It is the journey itself that is divine, and is GOD.
In reading my comment above one could confront me with THE glaring paradox: Josh, how can the “one mother” be both the material and holy spirit aspect? The lower and the higher? The answer:
Because the matter / spirit dichotomy is really no dichotomy at all. Both are co-eternal expressions of the ONE god in an eternal dance of experiencing itself. It is the process of the unmanifest becoming the manifest and the reverse again, but this time with the added ability to experience “SELF” as conscious awareness in deeper and more profound revelations. This is what Biblical immortality is. It is not living in a physical body forever, but rather gaining higher states of consciousness and bringing these states into higher and higher expressions in higher vibratory states of matter. The uncorrupt spiritual body is simply a body of higher vibration and more free will expression. I say free will because decision and thought are not so limited through dense physical matter.
Why do we reincarnate? Because of the desire mind. The soul that has expressed itself in the desire mind until physical death will gravitate towards it again. When Paul talks about death losing it’s sting in Christ he simply means that consciousness has grown to express itself no longer through the desire-mind of the lower ego and it’s passions, but rather through the higher spiritual mind, and therefore the causal body no longer needs a dense physical body to express consciousness through. In fact the lower nature and ego has already died and the lower qualities of the mind have already been sacrificed to the higher, and therefore the mind is no longer forced to gravitate towards the lower self after physical death.
God is no respector of persons. God is ONE power. Consciousness either expresses itself through the lower nature or the higher. The mind (man) has the choice. The mind can bring the lower thoughts and emotions under the will of the higher, and therefore is sacrificed and absorbed into the higher (I must decrease so that he can increase) or the mind can choose to run on autopilot and be at the mercy of it’s lower nature with instincts, desires, and impulses of the subconscious. But without exception the mind is the centre of man, and it must act as the rudder to rule the lower nature for the purpose of the higher. The mind is the firmament between the higher and lower waters of Genesis 1.
Again, Paul speaks of this when he talks about women being silent and submissive. He is not referring to the sexes, he is referring to attributes of the mind. The woman is emotion nature, which is divine, but must be transformed from lower to higher. The man (mind) is the rudder that steers the process. Works is about the mind disciplining the lower nature, and faith is about knowing it is a process that leads to the transformation of itself.
Again, this is why meditation is important. True meditation is the process of discovering the power and choice of the mind. It reveals the minds strengths and weaknesses. It lays bare the mind’s weaknesses, and also lays bare it’s strengths. It both strengthens the intellect and helps one to let the intellect go and be directed by intuition. But meditation is not the be all end all. It is a powerful tool when used correctly.
Now to one last point in your article and to conclude my lengthy comment. You astutely mention Elohim with the singular verb bara from Genesis, and juxtapose it with Elohim with the plural verb when speaking of false Gods. I never saw this in scripture, and you said you have never seen it addressed. As I meditate upon this revelation now, it is easy to see something vitally important expressed in the scripture esoterically and which is relevant to our discussion:
Elohim is plural itself and Yaweh (LORD) is not mentioned with it in Genesis one because God / ELohim is simply a way of expressing the multi-faceted and diversity of the ONE unmanifested consciousness into diverse manifestations and individual self-consciousness (through creation). It is used with the singular verb bara because creation has one singular goal, to evolve consciousness through diversity and the experience of opposites at first, but then back to unity and self-realization of ONENESS. However, when it assumes expression through the lower self, it commits idolatry which keeps it grounded in Maya, illusion, and separateness of it’s own plural expression. In other words, Thou shall have no other God’s before me is simply a way of saying, thou shall not stay in the illusion of Maya, but return unto the state of ONENESS. When one has false Gods the expression of the verb is plural because of the natural state of Maya, or illusion. Does this make sense? It is late and I am writing fast and furious, so if it is not well explained please let me know. But Paul and I recently had a discussion that has something to do with this. Genesis chapter one and chapter two show the creation process in reverse because:
Genesis chapter one shows the involution process complete. God rests on the 7th day because of the blueprint for the soul of man is complete. In other words, involution is complete and the latent potential of man is complete. Genesis chapter two begins the process of evolution, where that latent potential is in the process of becoming actual, or manifesting. The separation of Adam into Adam/Eve symbolizes the division of the whole complete mind (albeit without awareness) to the mind and emotion (Adam and Eve) and the long slow process of the journey through physical matter (the wilderness / dessert) back to oneness. In other words, Genesis one completes creation of the earth and all within (the blueprint of the potential soul) and Genesis two through Revelation is the completion of the evolution, or the evolved man into the Second Adam / Christ. This is also why Genesis two begins putting Yaweh (LORD) WITH Elohim. Herein also lies the great mistake and why the literalists who come up with all kinds of ways to explain the contradiction between Genesis 1 and Genesis chapter 2. Chapter 2 begins with the creation of man BEFORE the animals whereas Genesis 1 does the opposite. In an esoteric sense, there is no contradiction because all the animals and plants, etc. of Genesis chapter 1 are simply symbolic terms for man’s soul. Genesis chapter 2 begins the evolutionary process of the soul through evolution. This also explains the ancient idea of ADAM KADMON, which is the fact that all of creation is contained in the heavenly soul of man. In other words, all of the cosmos is in the blueprint soul of man in Genesis chapter 1 as per the involution process, whereas Genesis chapter 2 begins the evolutionary process of the cosmos and soul of man expressing ONENESS again and self-realization.
One mistake which confuses this is that those who made up today’s Bible should have ended chapter 1 with verse 2:3, because 2:4 is when Yaweh Elohim (LORD God) is first used. This would have made more sense. I realize the original had no chapters but since man altered it doing what I have mentioned above would have at least made more sense!
A great article, Anny. I thoroughly enjoyed it!
Blessings, and you are in all our thoughts during this trial you are experiencing.
Do you have any articles on Genesis 1?
Hi Derrick…
Anny has mentioned Genesis 1 throughout her articles on this site. I recommend some of her writings especially after Genesis 1 where she deals with the subject of Adam, Eve, and the serpent, but I will let her direct you as she sees fit with the links to her articles.
I have written an article dealing specifically on Genesis 1 here:
http://www.spiritofthescripture.com/id4351-genesis-1-unveiled.html
Hi Derrick,
thanks for your question. I am afraid that I cannot really help you there as I have mentioned this subject a lot all over the blog, and I have written 25 articles over the last seven years but I do not remember exactly what I mentioned in which article. In my first articles however I definitely did because there I had to explain things from the beginning. So I suggest you start looking there in the archives, starting from the bottom.
Thanks for your interest.
Josh ..
Thank you for this really good cutting edge comment on Anny’s wonderful article. Lots of Genesis meat here to chew on!
Glad you posted those links to Derrick. Definitely a must read Genesis-1 article.
Thanks Raymond. Genesis is so packed with meat. My mind is boggled by discovering the deeper revelation of the symbols every time I read it, and yet even what I think I have come to understand is still so limited in its true depth and scope. I look forward to continue digging in that rich rich source of information teaching us about ourselves. Maybe one day I’ll be satisfied to really tackle the Bhagavad Gita, which parallels it so much, or rather I should say it the other way around. One things for certain, the wisdom has a common root expressed through different culture.
Thanks Joshua for you extensive comment; it is almost an article in itself, which is very interesting as you see things often from a completely different angle than I do. I have a few remarks however:
You write that wisdom is feminine in the Bible. However, Wisdom is Chochma in Hebrew and it is the second sefira on the tree of life. It is placed on the right side of the tree which as far as I know is the male side. On the same level but on the left and female side you find Bina and that means Insight. Slightly below in the centre, and sometimes positioned behind the tree there is Da’at, which means Knowledge. In combination they are known as Chabad.
And wherever did you get your following interpretation: “One mistake which confuses this is that those who made up today’s Bible should have ended chapter 1 with verse 2:3, because 2:4 is when Yaweh Elohim (LORD God) is first used. This would have made more sense. I realize the original had no chapters but since man altered it doing what I have mentioned above would have at least made more sense!”?
In Genesis 1:4 the term YHWH is NOT used at all; I just checked in my copy of the Torah.
Anny…
Thanks for your comment. You must have been tired when reading through mine (happens to me quite a bit :). Read my quote again: “…because 2:4 is when Yaweh Elohim (LORD God) is first used.”
And that’s my point. The word for Yaweh (H3068) isn’t used in Chapter 1 at all. Why? Because it’s the involution process, whereas H3068 comes into the picture in chapter 2 as a first because God has rested and the involutionary process is complete. For readers who aren’t familiar with the term “involution,” it simply means the outpouring of the Logos into form / matter. In other words, man’s soul has been created in the image of the divine idea of God. The divine thought / pattern is complete and the Elohim rests. Now begins man’s evolutionary process, especially after eating the fruit of the serpent. Man now has to take the serpent (desire mind) and progressively transform it into the spiritual mind – slowly, first to the development of his moral nature (the Law/ conscience), where he / she begins the process of overcoming the natural ego, all the way to the Christ mind. This means taking the potential of the divine idea / pattern of the Elohim and fashioning it into the actual, being fully manifested in the consciousness of man. (This is why the Israelite is healed when they looked upon the serpent that Moses raised up on the pole. It symbolizes the desire mind being lifted up and transformed into a spiritual mind.)
As a baby has a potential intellectual end emotional mind at birth, it is still only a potential that develops as his/ her faculties mature as he/she experiences life. This “natural” process is a reflection of the “spiritual” process.
About wisdom:
Wisdom is most definitely portrayed as Feminine in the context of my comment. I will explain why with scripture and then comment on your comment about it’s masculine understanding through the tree (man / mind).
“She (wisdom) standeth in the top of high places, by the way in the places of the paths. She crieth at the gates, at the entry of the city, at the coming in at the doors.” (Proverbs 8:2-4).
Here Solomon personifies wisdom as “she.” This is the Binah aspect of wisdom you mentioned earlier. It is the Buddhi, or function of intuition, and sits just above the lower nature of man’s soul on the upper mental plane. “City” in the scripture above refers to man’s soul, and a “holy city” is always referring to the higher planes of man’s soul. Binah is what Solomon is referring to here. It “crieth” at the gates of the city, to the coming in the door because intuition must aid the intellect to birth wisdom, or understanding, the full development of a flash of insight.
In the tree of life and Kabbalah system, Chokhmah refers to the right hemisphere of the brain (the creative realm) whereas Binah refers to the left, the analytical mind. Chokhmah is referring to that apsect of your mind that receives new insight, but it is Binah which combines with Chokhmah to analyze all of its angles to provide “depth” of greater understanding.
This can all be confusing because modern psychology uses different terms that we are more accustom to. For example, right brain is creative and left brain is analytical. Left brain is intellect, analytical, and right brain is creative. This is also true. But the ancients did not lump the intellect in so limiting of terms. To them the entire system goes much more in depth to how the mind works. They understood that consciousness and thought does not originate in the physical brain, but comes from a variety of creative energies on the mental plane and above. This is also why someone cannot fully understand the Bible without having a knowledge of all of the planes that all the Bible symbols are referring to. The Bible is psychological and physiological manual, and the problem with interpreting it literally only reduces this great truth into some misunderstood super spiritual concept that takes man away from the knowledge and truth of him/herself.
With all that being said, I also humbly realize that I have a long way to go to fully integrating and understanding all these symbols myself. Currently I am using Binah to try and understand the depths of the symbols with the flashes of insight that I have gained. Again, I have a long, long way to go and the process is exciting and stimulating. Many times I will also be wrong with my interpretations, which is why I love to hear other’s ideas to continually reflect upon, compare, analyze, and seek to understand both the bigger picture of life and it’s details. And isn’t this why we are all here reading, to discuss, interpret, and more fully grasp this psychological manual, which we will all probably spend a lifetime of doing for those of us interested in such things. This is why I love your part of bringing the number aspect of Hebrew to the side of the table, because it adds such depth!
Anyway, in conclusion, Chokhmah is the overall bigger picture solution to a problem or idea or concept, while Binah is understanding all the particulars of that solution. Binah is the “womb” where concepts are fully brought to maturity and depth of understanding in all the particulars, and Chokhmah is the origin and source of inspiration for all those ideas. Therefore, as you say, Chokmah is masculine.
I hope this makes sense.
Hi Josh,
You are sure right that I was tired when I replied to your comment for I had kept it to the last because your comment was so long. So, I could hardly look out of my eyes (if that is even English) and at the moment it is not much better so If I write something silly you’ll know why.
You write: “The word for Yaweh (H3068) isn’t used in Chapter 1 at all.” I have two remarks here.
First it is the way you (or Strongs or whatever his name is?) you put the Name YHWH in writing. It is almost like saying it out loud which is terribly hurtful to traditional Jews. And somehow I seem to have inherited that during the years that I lived with them. It feels like having become a little bit Jewish myself which is of course nonsense but does feel that way.
The second is that number, H3068, in this case, which somehow fixes a definition of a term and also again is an authority who states something. That does not have to mean anything negative to you but it does to me as I have taken distance to any authority figure whatever since the leaders of the churches (probably not even knowing it themselves) have saddled us with doctrines that are not true. Using Bible tools like Strongs is okay of course but I do not believe that all they teach is necessarily THE truth, which quoting a number like the one above somehow suggests to me. But then, maybe that is just me. You should know this about me though.
Thanks for your explanation about Chokhma (is that how you write it in the English transcription?) and Bina. It is very interesting though a bit complicated. I do know about the Tree of Life and the sefirot but have never studied more extensively about it.
Where you write: ” With all that being said, I also humbly realize that I have a long way to go to fully integrating and understanding all these symbols myself. Currently I am using Binah to try and understand the depths of the symbols with the flashes of insight that I have gained. Again, I have a long, long way to go and the process is exciting and stimulating. Many times I will also be wrong with my interpretations, which is why I love to hear other’s ideas to continually reflect upon, compare, analyze, and seek to understand both the bigger picture of life and it’s details. And isn’t this why we are all here reading, to discuss, interpret, and more fully grasp this psychological manual, which we will all probably spend a lifetime of doing for those of us interested in such things. This is why I love your part of bringing the number aspect of Hebrew to the side of the table, because it adds such depth!”, I can only agree with you for one hundred percent!
Anny…
No worries. I understand where you are coming from. But it’s important to note that Strong’s Concordance is not so much about providing an interpretation or commentary, it’s just an index for the English. It can be useful for finding where certain Hebrew words are used more quickly, and the root words that comprise them. It does, however, provide several English equivalents (which I usually ignore), and, as you point out, can be grossly wrong because Hebrew is not well translated into English in the first place! Hebrew has such a depth to it that English words do not encapsulate. For example, a simple Hebrew phrase that is conveying a psychological process within the human soul can take many paragraphs of English to properly explain in our modern way of thinking. Your method with numerology often times brings instant clarity in the mind of what is being conveyed, although even then it can be hard to translate into English words. From mind to speech, the Hebrew meaning can lose some of it’s rich flavor.
I only put the number there to show where the Tetragrammaton is first used in the original Hebrew. So it begs us to ask the question, “why,” and probe the inner mind for an answer. I only point this out because I believe the Tetragrammaton is indicative of the process of the cycle of involution, the outpouring of the logos, that is complete, and therefore, God rests. This is not the end of the story, perse, but the end of a cycle. There are actually three outpourings of the Logos, according to ancient esoteric literature, which indicate the different stages of consciousness in different grades of matter. But we’ll save that for another post, especially since I don’t fully understand it all yet!
As for how I spelled it, Yaweh, I meant no offense. In English, that’s the way it would sound when being pronounced.
Thanks again Anny for the engaging discussion. I hope you and your family are well today, and I’m so glad you were able to post this. I wish we could get the entire SOS community together on a tropical island for a week to discuss spirituality where I presume we would all sometimes agree, sometimes agree to disagree, and sometimes disagree with each other. But wouldn’t that be fun!
Hello Josh,
The eastern religions are wrestling with the same thing. The main problem with pantheism as i understand it is the epistemic collapse that is described here. You appear to be a Neo-Platonist of sorts but have removed the ineffable godhead from the equation? Anyway, i would welcome your thoughts once you have read through this persons post:
https://www.ashishdalela.com/2016/04/19/advaita-the-partial-truth/
I think that what you realize when you look across the various philosophies and religions is that they have all wrestled with the same problem you have been wrestling with over the course of your years namely the relationship between god, the universe and us.
In my view the bible is written for your higher self and lower self, one the eternal truth, the other the truth “down here” in our present time that the bible for instance was written in. Mostly these texts are literal AND symbolic. One of the things that struck me about adi shankara ( the origins of pantheism in vedantic thought) is that he rightly rebuffed animal sacrifice described in the Vedas by the Rishis and Sages ………but those were not literal animals to be sacrificed 😉 The vedas are a complex text but they, just like the bible, are veiled.
Just my thoughts. Also have a read of Leibniz monadology, this is possibly aligned with your current thinking. Reach out to me if you have any questions.
Oh yeah – adam and eve:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%ADf_and_L%C3%ADf%C3%BErasir
Hi Stephan…
I have read through your link on Advaita, and I will share my thoughts. The article does a good job in the first section explaining why the material world is false according to the Bhagavad-Gita: not because it is not real, but because it is changing, appearing and disappearing through different forms. Anything in a permanent state of change cannot be the ultimate reality, because ultimate reality is unchanging. Well and good.
However, where he loses me (and this may be my own limited understanding) is in the third section, “The problem of deciding Truth.” In this section he states:
“Now we are left with Consciousness that decides the truth. But if we simply regulate the truth to our conscious choices…”
Now wait a minute here…is he referring to consciousness expressed through the lower or higher self? And has he considered pure self awareness, and abiding reality that has nothing to do with thought, or choice, but is simply the observer of such said choice? As I read further I was unable to understand what he’s trying to say. Choice is relegated to the intellect, which is a discriminatory factor that analyzes and compares opposites. Limiting consciousness to the intellect, in my opinion, is near-sighted (I am not saying he does this, but his “choice” of words here leaves me with a vagueness of the issue he is referring to, namely the incompleteness of Advaita philosophy or the modern misrepresentation of it?).
Further along he states, “There is, hence, an internal inconsistency in Advaita because it considers each person as a god, and rejects a separate God. The inconsistency is that the so called ‘god’ – who is the final arbiter of all their choices – sometimes realizes that they made a mistake.” I don’t know exactly what to make of this unless I more deeply studied Advaita, because I am again returned to my earlier problem of what I stated above. In the next sentence he states, “If Brahman is the eternal truth, then how can it sometimes make a mistake…?”
Is he speaking of the Brahma, the male creator idea of the Indian pantheon, or the Brahman, the ineffable, impersonal principle of the cosmos which emanates all things? Because the later doesn’t make choices or could ever have a “realization” that it made a mistake. He later states, “If you are the arbiter of choice, then you could never be wrong,” hence the dilemma. But what does he mean when he says “you?” The realization of self as in object and subject? In other words, he seems to be making a dilemma out of something that isn’t there. By that statement I am in no way saying he is wrong (perhaps I have completely misunderstood what he is getting at). Your thoughts?
Hello Josh,
I think in a way he is saying that if the only thing that is true is rooted in eternity then you can’t use language to make that argument because that (Language) isn’t true either and so all the propositional statements that advaita rely on fall back on themselves – the apparent epistemological collapse.
I ended up reading Saul kripke and Berkeley to wrap my head around epistemology or how we know the things we know. Hegel is worth a read too, but, and this is the crux of the problem. Follow the advaita tradition and you are left with your perspective only or perspectivism in the leibniz tradition. Advaita never takes you to the “other side” that Kant et al start exploring.
The Brahmins much like our Pharisees were supposed to make your God kings, the god men walking. But over time they started taking literally the Vedas. Adi Sankara was born into a family of Brahmin who didn’t understand their own texts and he rebelled against their traditions etc not realising that those traditions he was rebelling against were not understood by his own priestly class of people.
I’m trying to tell you that Advaita takes you to your lower self, your perspective on the universe and nothing more. To put it bluntly, your real you is not “here” in time and space. This is what the western mystery schools did, they reunited your double aspect. They don’t seem to any longer, they lost their magic too. God doesn’t like secrets it seems. I’ll send you the CIA project startgate paper if you are interested in knowing more from an engineers perspective.
Stephen…
Thanks for the clarification. It’s sort of like confusing the term “higher self” for individuality. Individuality is a by product of the higher self manifested. Consciousness manifests as dual, and because of this, a personality get’s attached to it as the individuality experiences life. However each personality is fleeting and dies, but the personality gives up the experiences it acquires wherein it sacrifices itself to higher causes to be integrated with the higher self.
I think this is where the epstimological collapse has meaning. As you allude to, without a proper understanding of the higher self and the lower self and all the vehicles of each plane in both (something I am still trying to understand) all philosophies and theories fall short.
Does the higher self send energies down to the lower self and perfect it, or is it that the lower self sacrifices itself and is therefore absorbed into the higher self. Do we kill the ego, or lay it aside, like someone that neglects something. Do we discipline it, or do we forget it? It all depends on how we think about it.
Another problem is trying to understand the greatest mystery of all. How did something come from nothing? Sure, today’s greatest scientific minds can take us all the way back to 10^30 milliseconds (or whatever) after the big bang and tell us about quantum foam and fields that are already there that get agitated to producing virtual particles that pop into and out of existence through a disturbance in the field, and from there we somehow get a real particle. All well and good, they have effectively taught us something without ever answering the real question – something from nothing. This is the same as the esptimological collapse your speaking of.
I read a book called The Grand Universe of Primary Consciousness some years ago that changed my life forever. Nothing is an imaginary concept, and there can never be nothing. Nothing is simply potential. Potential in a true vacuum would be unstable, and an intrinsic tension causes primary consciousness to interact with itself, creating space and time and illusionary individual points of manifestation (duality), and even the physical effect of gravity within this matrix. Gravity in a sense can be seen as the byproduct of the inflow of consciousness upon itself. That book I consider to be on the same level as Blavatsky’s The Secret Doctrine and Isis Unveiled. It actually reconciles the esptimological collapse issue with a modern day unified field theory (if it’s correct). But it made sense to me, whereas your average every modern day scientists would call it insanity.
And yes, I would love to see the CIA project startgate paper as it sounds interesting. The book I referenced above is now scrubbed from the web (?) but I can get direct you where to still get it if you wish.
I think what is being described is panentheism not pantheism. Small but large difference. Richard Rohr does great work in this realm, and “The Universal Christ” fits right in with all of this.
Great post, and great discussion!
Namaste
Perhaps, it harks back to the Renaissance idea and hermetica in particular and their grappling with panentheism and pantheism….particularly Spinoza and latterly leibniz. The best way to describe it is kind of like using the infamous statement I am in my father and my father is in me but the hermetic axiom the all is in the all and all is in the all holds less connotation.
In a way it is a strange regress but mathematical set theory (And holograms) describes the relationship between the unity in diversity whilst maintaining the integrity of both. It actually leads to a strange monotheistic belief system ironically and the idea of sons/daughters of God (mini gods / Demi gods) without polytheism….more like monotheism accomodating henotheism. Similar to Atenism I believe.
Thanks for your comment Amanda and for mentioning the work of Richard Rohr, which I have also got to know during the months of my illness.
I include a link to one of his speeches about the Universal Christ so everyone can judge for themselves:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KD7B3wr3xeY
Amanda…
As I reflect back on my thoughts, I can sometimes identify with panentheism and other times more identify with pantheism. Perhaps there is truth in between, which I am still undecided on, but I will provide a thought:
In one sense pantheism is more accurate, but the greater reality has a touch of panenthiesm. By this I mean that the overall consciousness of God is also expanding and evolving through us, which is the touch of something akin to panenthiesm, but more accurately within the confines of pantheism, since it still directly identifies God with Nature. In other words, the aspect of God which is above and outside of limited manifestation is simply the ever potential of expanding consciousness of his unified nature.
One thing I am sure of is that all these “isms” can give one a headache’ism 🙂
@Anny, I wish you strength to grow past all these happenings. Although just beginning to grasp some idea about the reason of sickness, I would like to point to GNM, an unique approach to sickness, developed by Dr Hamer. It describes different phases we go through and some are redefined as part of the healing process (cf Dr Hamer). The whole idea is highly controversial and is being targetted as idiocy by the medical establishment. It is also very useful (imo) in relation to the corona hysteria.
I looked at ‘From Quarks to Love in Ancient Hebrew Mysticism: Zvi Ish-Shalom’ and it feels very authentic, thank you. It humbled me to know and realize in what company I am. I think i am more like a Norman heathen in comparison to this wisdom. I can feel the message of non-dualitiy to be an ultimate purpose, the continuing onslaught right now by the ‘beings in power’ makes that I want to fight. To me the (biblical) angel of death has found ways to express itself in today’s world. I know use blood and color my entrance so it will pass. But what about the ones I love that are drawn into its field of destruction ? I know God is Love, but there are many gods that are opposing us in our sincere desire to know and be free.
I wish for myself and all of you a clearness of mind, and find ways to go through these tribulations.
Regards, Leo.
This website has a very comprehensive overview that invalidates all governmental interventions. so-called to protect the widespread of the corona madness. These interventions actually are causing the damage.we experience right now.
https://jbhandleyblog.com/home/lockdownlunacy
Hello Leo,
Thanks for your two comments and the information you added in the accompanying link.
I understand that it might be difficult for you to understand the concept of nonduality if you have never considered it before but once you start thinking in this way it is so much more wonderful than duality where there is a constant struggle going on.
Illness is a great teacher too, believe me, at least if you are willing to listen to the message.
As far as the corona hysteria is concerned, I have applied myself to overcoming the fear of it and once I succeeded in that I felt much better. As to the actual situation in our family, we just got the message that our son did not have the corona disease and all quarantine measures have been lifted.
So all is well that ends well.
Hi Anny,
Reading my last reference would convince people with an open mind that there is no pandemic and that fear itself is causing all the damage.
I am happy you feel well again ?
GNM will prove to be the way to go, it may take a couple of 100 years 🙂
Non-duality has been on my menu (on and off) for 30+ years (1984, onwards, a course in miracles). I like it to be the interlude between times of duality. It can not be real life here in this world. This is in my opinion unrealistic.
See Luke 12:53 and more pronounced Matthew 10:35 (International Version
For I have come to turn “‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law–).
We have to go through duality to learn. Backing out is imo a retreat (to recuperate, ok nice).
Nevertheless i do study the material offered here. It just makes me wonder where people stand in the real world, with real things happening. Right now, June 2020, all liberties are being capped, still the aidvanta proponents say that peace is possible ???
I am now looking at a youtube from the rabbi published about 2 years ago, titled ‘freedom is possible – passover 2018’.
And, sorry, but i am very sceptical. The reason ? Worldwide i have seen little comments on the happenings of these last 6 months from the ‘established’ religions. People behave like sheep, even these so-called leaders of men. I know, to be in the world and not off the world is a big challenge. But, imo, it all starts by making ‘a clean schip’, watertight (emotion resistant), open mind but grounded in the real world.
Anyways i know my stance is very different from most people, so be it. And what can not be understood in the mind will play out in the physical world by the subconciousnes. And that is not the same as maya, it is more the unbalanced outpour of emotional energy into the material world (also disturbed by the influx of foreign interference).
Be well.
Leo…
Your last statement puts everything into its proper perspective. You state…
“…it is more the unbalanced outpour of emotional energy into the material world…”
Absolutely. Most thought, opinions, ideas, are entangled with emotion. Notice in the world today, especially in politics, people are causing further division and negativity by feeding it with lower emotion. Our job is to refine thought to the point that the intellect is in charge of the emotional nature. The higher emotions, peace, love, unity bring balanced perspectives, but the insanity of the world stems from the lower emotions, which blurs true thinking (i.e., being able to understand what is being said instead of being affected by how something is said). This kind of thinking is unable to empathize with other points of view, because it doesn’t seek the bigger picture. Notice that everything in today’s world is about being PC, or political correct. Although this can have an advantageous side, it has become a cancer. People take certain statements out of context and then build a false narrative around it on both sides of the political arena. They isolate, personalize, and attack without relenting until they “feel” they are being heard with their own personal agenda. And then others that “know” better feed the agenda for personal desires of power. They are the most guilty for adding fuel to the fire, and care nothing for the betterment of the human condition.
I don’t usually address those types of things on the blog because doing so usually brings little benefit. “Be ye as wise as the serpent but as harmless as the dove.” I have had some people come at me since all this stuff began looking to pick an emotional verbal argument, but when someone comes emotionally-charged looking for a way to validate their own feelings, they aren’t going to listen to anything you say anyway. They either want you to agree or you become the enemy. I refuse to engage or submit to such an agenda. The world will have to work it out for itself, and sometimes it is wise to stay out of it. Of course the opposite is true as well, but you have to know when, where, and how, or you’ll just get bulldozed.
You infer that a lot of people disagree with you, or that you think differently, but Leo, you are a sincere, honest, and caring person, which is evident in your comments and mostly in our e-mail correspondance. You seek to bring peace into the world and to be a light for the things you believe in. We all do this in our own way on particular paths, and I want you to know that I have a great respect for you. When you disagree with me, you state it directly and honestly, but you do it with sincerity and an openness of mind. You have also challenged me with great points causing further reflection in my own thoughts many times before, which is greatly appreciated. I might not always agree with you, but I will always hear you out and compare it deeply with my own thought process, and ends up resonating, I will incorporate it.
Blessings.
Hello Anny,
Really great to read your fine insightful work again. Yeah, it’s been a while since your last post, but, sure here you are now and that’s great!
Your articles, Anny, always carry a spiritual weight, but, through your in-depth understanding of scriptures and numerology, this weight is always made inspirationally light. Your article themes have mostly been on Unconditional Love, or, as you put in numerology 26 13+13 or echad + ahava = Unconditional Love. You always manage to convey this biblical theme message really well in all your articles, including today’s post.
As you know, Anny, you’ve a huge amount of followers here on SoS, people you’ve inspired spiritually over the years. And am absolutely certain, without a scintilla of doubt, that every single one of these souls, including myself, are now praying, cheering and shouting for you — and your family — at this time. Cheering: HEALING, HEALTH, HAPPINESS for you and your courageous two sons, grandchildren and ALL of your blessed family for a quick and speedy recovery to optimal heath!! That, every day you’re each growing in abundant strength, courage and immunity.
Thanks again, Anny, for today’s really great and informative article.
Echad Ahava, Raymond
Hi Raymond,
Thanks for your comment. I am glad that you appreciate my article as I think that this issue of unconditional love and unity in diversity is so important in these days.
I heard from Joshua that you also had written one or two articles again and I hope to see them on the blog soon.
As far as my family is concerned, we just now got the news that my youngest son did not have the Corona disease after all so all restrictions have been lifted and our grandson will be able to go to school again on Monday.
Echad and Ahava to you too, Raymond. You have never forgotten those concepts since I introduced them, have you?
Thanks, Anny, for sharing the great news that your youngest son got the all-clear. True, I’ve never forgotten the echad ahava concepts since you first highlighted them here way back. Thank you for that.
Blessings.
Thanks Josh.
I just had a remarkable dream (contents undisclosed because it needs to ‘mature’ inside me).
And then i was reminded of ‘Let it be’. I know the version of the Beatles. I went to youtube and found Aretha Franklin, wow. One of my favorites !
Here it is https://youtu.be/rsYAnzAoa9c
Kind regards to all
Tremendous Article, Anny. You cover a lot of topics here and you cover all of them very well. I will add my two cents to the comments here.
You said this:
So while there is no God outside us because we are in God and God is in us, we still may want to experience communication and therefore pretend that God is outside of us.
This to me is actually the crux of the matter. We are God’s temple, meaning that we are where God and Christ rule. This is made even more clear by the following scripture: … the Kingdom of God is within you (Luke 17:21). Of course, God and Christ rule in their Kingdom. Thus, we are where God and Christ rule, . Any spirit that runs contrary to this is the spirit of Antichrist, which teaches a Christ outside of us (John 4:2-3), but Scripture teaches that “greater is he that is IN YOU, than he that is in the world (v. 4).
Thus, I believe this concept to be central to the “nature of God,” i.e., the understanding that God dwells within us and not outside of us. Seeking God where he is not (and this is where western religion in general leads us astray) takes us away from God and does not bring us near to him. I believe this to be a key reason for all the wars and dissension within the human race.
“The way of peace they know not” (Is. 59:8).
Seeking God outside of us leads us to an incredible dilemma, and one we have been facing as a human race for virtually as long as there’s been a human race. That is, what man — or is there even any man, or group of men — that can actually and adequately lead us to God. Where do we go to find “Him?” Every religion has a different teaching about God. Every religion thinks their watch is correct. How do we know, and know that we know, who’s correct and who’s not? Are ANY of them correct? Could they ALL be wrong? Could they perhaps all be right but in different ways? How can we ever know?
This external seeking for God is what Scripture refers to as “outer darkness, where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.” We argue and debate about who or what God is. We have an intense desire to know, and in that intense desire we often argue and fight with others about who’s right and who’s not.
This external seeking is the genesis of all religion. But far from engendering peace, what has it actually caused?
Division.
Religion divides people, it doesn’t bring them together. Western religion, for the most part, says you have to believe in what we believe in, or you are an unbeliever.
Hardly unity in diversity. In fact, quite the opposite. I believe this to be a primary reason why there is so much dissension in the world. We are looking for God where he is not and we’re not finding him there. Thus, we’re not finding the peace and love we are seeking.
If you’ve ever asked the question, if God is love, then how is it that there we don’t see love manifested everywhere? I believe this to be the answer to that question. We have not been able to truly find God in the places where we’re looking for “Him.”
Well, it looks like I’m about to write a book, so I’ll stop here for now. I may add more later, because there’s a lot to chew on in this article. In short, Anny, it is my believe that you nailed many of the concepts you address here. I just thought to expound on a couple. Of course, any comments to my comment are invited.
Paul…
An incredible mouthful to chew on here! You state…
“This external seeking for God is what Scripture refers to as “outer darkness, where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.” We argue and debate about who or what God is. We have an intense desire to know, and in that intense desire we often argue and fight with others about who’s right and who’s not.
This external seeking is the genesis of all religion. But far from engendering peace, what has it actually caused?”
I like that! I have never considered “outer darkness” in this way.
Hi Paul,,
Thank you for your beautiful comment. As always I agree with you about most of it but I do have some additions to make.
As I already warned the commenters about it took a few days to give a reply to your comments because I was actually exhausted after writing the article plus the first set of comments.
You write: “We are God’s temple, meaning that we are where God and Christ rule. This is made even more clear by the following scripture: … the Kingdom of God is within you (Luke 17:21). Of course, God and Christ rule in their Kingdom. Thus, we are where God and Christ rule, . Any spirit that runs contrary to this is the spirit of Antichrist, which teaches a Christ outside of us (John 4:2-3), but Scripture teaches that “greater is he that is IN YOU, than he that is in the world (v. 4).”
We have already corresponded about this matter once and you know that I do not quite agree with you here. I do not see this as either .. or but as both. So the Christ is in us, and the messenger, Jesus, who is the person who came to remind us of this and to teach us the way to go in order to get back to that understanding, is outside of us. As God is (in) All that Is however, SHe / It is an embodiment of God however, God is present outside of us as well. But I agree with you that that second part of God is not what we are looking for in this context.
Religion as such does not divide people, I believe. I personally have experienced the churches I have been a member of (in the different locations I have been living in) almost always as loving and supportive, and never as sponsoring the idea that ‘we’ were the only ones ‘to be saved’. On the contrary They worked together, also with other religions, for common goals. It is claiming exclusivity and sole possession of the truth that causes all the problems but that is not something that only religions have to deal with. That is true for other collectives and on a personal basis as well.
And as for love being manifested? Well, you know I have been in bed for most of the time for 18 months now, and as such I have been able to see lots of You Tube videos which show acts of love, and kindness, and willingness to help, and of caring for any category of beings that need help. It does not get into the limelight because the news is mostly focused on negative things but this side of humanity is there and is growing under the current circumstances! So do not despair when only the ugly side seems to manage it to get into the news.
I hope all this makes sense to you as I am still not able to concentrate very well.
Hi Anny, I hope this comment finds you well and pain free. I want to thank you for sharing a small glimpse into your life and the blessings you’ve witnessed on your journey.
I found the video by Rabbi Zvi Ish-Shalom to be incredibly informative and interesting. One of my goals is to learn and understand Hebrew and to experience the scriptures as it was written.
Something you said resonates within me…….”recognize and acknowledge that all major world religions in their essence are all about the same thing: unconditional love and unity in diversity, and that there is no one religion that solely is in possession of the truth whereas all others somehow got it wrong. And it means that we will have to cooperate with each other to reach this goal together.”…… If we don’t set aside our differences then how can we come together to celebrate our similarities.
I also find it interesting how we as westerners understand God in the singular whereas it’s plural (Elohim) in the Hebrew language. In Genesis 1; 26 –
26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness……… It’s written in the plural form and the very next verse it reverts back to it’s singular;
27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him;….
I too believe that God resides within us and we have to awaken his presence to receive his gifts and glory.
Again, thank you for sharing your understanding and journey.
Ken
Hi Ken,
Thanks for your comment. I really appreciate it as I feel that we somehow resonate.
It is a good idea to want to learn Hebrew but only do it when you have the time and the strength to really commit yourself to it. It is very different from our modern languages, with of course a different script, and I only managed to get some grip on it when I lived in Israel where I heard it spoken all around me (once outside of our village). But once you do get past a certain stage it is very satisfying.
You write: “I also find it interesting how we as westerners understand God in the singular whereas it’s plural (Elohim) in the Hebrew language. In Genesis 1; 26 –
26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness……… It’s written in the plural form and the very next verse it reverts back to it’s singular”.
27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him;….”
Here you overlook something. God is plural – gods, as you say, but with a verb in the singular form it means that the appearance and actions of ‘these gods’ have become a unity in diversity and therefore appear, speak and act as One at all times.
Maybe this is also our future as human beings – who up till now are more acting like the idols in the Bible and who therefore get a verb in plural – once we have learned to become and act as one. Isn’t that a great future to look forward to?
Out of intense curiosity a small poll
Who experienced inner darkness as well as outer darkness ?
And similar who experienced inner light as wel as outer light ?
I ask this because i have experienced outer darkness and when i told bystanders of my surprise they told me ‘that is you. Leo, who is doing that’.. I felt so ashamed at that time, i fled the scene, only to return 3 months later…
That may explain my studies about ‘darkness’ and ‘dark matters’ You see i am fully aware that i have a dark side. I am not so aware of its contents or how it expresses itself. (work-in-progress)
Hi Leo,
I have a bit of a problem with your question as you obviously have a different approach to spirituality. Not that there is anything wrong with that, only it is more difficult in that case to understand what you mean exactly.
Did I experience inner darkness or outer darkness? Well, if you mean did I experience difficult circumstances (outer darkness)? Yes. Did I experience inner darkness? When I focused too much on illness, problems, loneliness? Yes. But then I always managed to revert to positive thinking and a loving focus and the darkness faded. It only stays when one keeps focusing on difficulties, pain, etc. without switching back in time. But maybe you mean something different with your question. I did not make a point of examining my dark side; I do prefer to put my focus on returning to the side of love and light and unity as much as I can. And then the things that appear to be so difficult prove to have a silver lining as well.
Sure you have a dark side. We all do, at least to begin with. But we do not need to put our whole focus on it. I believe that we should address matters when they present themselves to us in a natural way; in that case we should not avoid looking into the concerning matter deeply and ‘eat’ it. You remember what I wrote about the tamar, the 400-mar, which is the bitterness of the slavery and the cross, but when you consciously ‘eat’ it, that is taste, swallow and digest it, then it will turn out to be a date, which is sweet and nutritious. Darkness is part of the whole process and we will have to work through it ourselves but there is no need to blame ourselves, or anybody else for that matter, for whatever seems to be wrong. It is all a part of our learning experience on our way to conscious awareness.
Do you still live in Thailand?
I already replied by email
I see darkness enveloping me on the outside with my physical eyes. At times in twilight conditions my peripheral vision notices movements of dark and bright ‘energies’. When i bring it to focus the condition disappears.
When i close my eyes i can see an innerlight, its brightness fluctuates. Some time last week that vision disappeared, there was only darkness. It took a lot of effort to see that innerlight again.
Hi Anny,
At first I did not find this entry on the blog, so I replied via email.
A slightly redacted version of the email follows :
Yes, I still live in Thailand. And it will remain so if not dictated otherwise by extreme circumstances. In 2015 I said goodbye to my family in the Netherlands. I still have weekly telephone contact with my father’s second wife. She is now 84 years old, but still very lively.
Well, to me, spirituality is something practical. I learn from empirical things. So if I read something that I find interesting, I want to experience something of it.
My cosmology is a bit chaotic (work-in-progress).
I understand about myself that I am changing myself from a revengeful person to one who is more neutral. And that also changes my idea about god (going from a god of revenge to a more peace abiding one).
My question about darkness was perhaps out of context for spiritual people. I meant that I literally saw darkness around me (outer darkness). I was enveloped in that darkness. And that was a shocking event. At certain times of the day, during the transition from light to dark and vice versa, I sometimes see black and/or luminous movements in the periphery of my eyed. When I focus on it, it disappears immediately. That’s empirical spirituality to me. I’ve had conversations with people who see “abnormal things” in the past (people in mental institutes, home care and so-called ‘normal’)
Perceiving darkness within was also a shocking discovery (inner darkness). I can see my own inner light at times. That can light chanhes. It can grow, but also decrease in strength. Recently (covid happening) I noticed that I had lost that inner look (it remained dark in me). Another shock.
It took a lot of effort to get it back.
I would have liked to hear from others.
Well, I don’t believe in a god that is only good. Higher frequencies do not necessarily mean better to me. For me, the cosmos looks stepped. I live in a being who is not god but is much more developed than me. My own development is commissioned by that being. That being lives in a being much more comprehensive and so on. The same goes for the microcosm. There are immense worlds in me that in turn experience me as something much more comprehensive. For me the task rests the task to be good for all internal parts.
Sincerely,
Leo.
Hi Leo,
Thanks for your two replies. Well, you do have a very different approach to things than I have so it does not really surprise me that we come to different conclusions and have different experiences. Besides that, you look for some kind of experiences consciously whereas to me they just happen, whether caused by my way of thinking or not. So for both of us it is kind of difficult to understand the other. I replied to your information from my way of thinking which obviously does not satisfy you completely but there is not much of an alternative for either of us.
In your second comment you explain how you literally experience inner and outer darkness and light. In this literal sense this is totally unknown to me.
Also the way you experience God. I believe in God as Unconditional Love and Unity in diversity. So I also believe in a God who is Good (without an opposite evil). This does not necessarily mean soft. Love can be very hard if necessary but its goal is always inclusive. Nobody is excluded from anything but we all have to suffer the consequences from our deeds; not in order to punish us but in order to learn from each experience, and grow more conscious and wiser in the process. The seemingly negative prophecies in the Bible are only warnings and not threats. If we listen and act accordingly, nothing bad will happen. If not, what we will suffer will only be the consequence of our own deeds but not a punishment.
Let’s see if this will stick (i tried 3 times to give a reply already)
all following is imo (in my opinion), so i don’t need to repeat that too much
prophesies : all written or otherwise sent out ideas of a future event will be the founding of a cadre in which that event most likely will come to pass. the bigger the loudspeaker, the bigger the crowd, the more co-creators will attend (and co-create). see the daily weather forecasts.
to believe in a God that includes only Good is being blind to reality. a blindness that will extract a heavy toll. when love is mentioned then hate is mentioned within the same breathe.
God is ineffable, so i will not refer to that much. i believe in entities that have access to much more wisdom that I will ever have. and these entities are not infallible. and those entities are Good with an opposing Evil. with reasons beyond my comprehension.
because i am incomplete i create incomplete. as a consequence somewhere along the line i will have to undo my creations. as a punsihment ? not so much, more like cleaning the slate and position for a new beginning.
with this stated i feel my plate is already full. i will try to become complete. i will find a way to agree with opposition. i am willing to learn
Hi Leo,
Thanks for your reaction but I must admit that I am a little surprised by it. I really cannot follow you there and there is nothing I can explain to you about my view that I have not already written before. So I propose to leave the matter for what it is and accept the fact that we have totally different opinions about this particular matter.
I agree.
I must have been mistaken between ‘The Nature of God’, emphasize on nature and that what I believe. Sorry for that one.
I will let it rest.