Definitions of God

[Apech]

Many religions say that you shouldn't make any images of God, I think the most important aspect of this teaching which many don't understand is that you shouldn't make any mental images of God. All the definitions and negative deductions may just be attempts to make mental images which don't help you as it is a concept which can only be understood through the heart and not the mind. It's just a thought.

 

Except that if God=the Absolute, then any mental image (or any other predicate) is not different to the source.

 

The Egyptians practice Henotheism through which any single god can stand for the Absolute at any time and the god may change with time/person doing the 'worshiping'.

 

Read Hornung 'The One and the Many - Concepts of God in Ancient Egypt' if you are interested.

Amazon

[Apech]

Im curious about the mention of 'high level' -- why is it 'high level'?

 

...

 

Well I assumed it as some kind of primary energy interaction and that's what I meant by high level but of course you may be right.

[Aaron]

I am drawn to this one:

 

21. God is the darkness in the soul that remains after light.

 

What does it mean?

 

 

 

Well this could have several meanings in an analogical way. I would assume that this may have to do with the idea that God exists within everything, that he is even fear and doubt. Remember the Hermetic's view of God wasn't like the Christian view, but akin to the Hindu, in which God or Shiva didn't just inhabit everything, but it was everything. So God is even fear and doubt, God is even death and life, God is unfathomable and the only part we know is what we can ascribe to it on this Earth.

 

Without understanding the original author's ideas regarding hermeticism, what I would have to conclude is that light is the illumination of the soul, enlightenment so to speak, and darkness is again, fear, doubt, those negative emotions that exist within us. Unlike many traditions, the hermetics didn't believe that once you became enlightened you became perfect, but rather that flaws were a persistent condition of the human being.

 

Aaron

Edited April 20, 2012 by Twinner

[goldisheavy]

Yes that's interesting. But of course I am not sure that the definitions were ever meant to be non-contradictory hence the 24 Philosophers with their different definitions which they were meant to debate.

 

Ah, if these definitions are not meant as strict definitions, but as departure points for contemplation, as contemplative tools, then it all makes sense.

[Apech]

Ah, if these definitions are not meant as strict definitions, but as departure points for contemplation, as contemplative tools, then it all makes sense.

 

Yes Gold I should have explained this. Here is what the prologue says:

 

Twenty four Philosophers were gathered. Only one problem remained open to them. What is God?

 

After discussion they decided to allow themselves time to think and to make an appointment to come together again. Each was then to present his thesis regarding God in the form of a definition. From the various definitions they wanted to ascertain something certain about God and come to a determination by general agreement.

 

So, yes the 24 definitions were the kicking off point for debate ....or further contemplation ...

[三江源]

God is the darkness in the soul that remains after the light.

 

This is supreme nurturance.

 

If you feel forsaken by the light ie God, God is there in the dark.

 

If the logos, the explicit, the known, forsakes you.. then the darkness, the formless, the unknown, is there: also God.

 

Whenever you think there is nothing.. that too is God.

 

(seems to be clarified by 24)

[Harmonious Emptiness]

21. God is the darkness in the soul that remains after light.

 

"The Great Spirit is the sound in the silence."

"There was a great silence... The kind of silence that the White Man is afraid of."

 

- Native American

[Apech]

21. God is the darkness in the soul that remains after light.

 

"The Great Spirit is the sound in the silence."

"There was a great silence... The kind of silence that the White Man is afraid of."

 

- Native American

 

Bloody hell, that's brilliant where's it from?

[Thunder_Gooch]

I believe God is that which truly exists, yet has no physical form, no tangible physical existence.

 

It is your consciousness, it is my consciousness, it is every beings consciousness.

 

It is both the origin and final destination of our minds, it was what we were one with before birth and shall be apart of again after death.

 

It is the empty void of space, and yet it is anything but empty. I believe it is an infinite mind, or infinite spirit, or infinite intelligence. However you wish to think of it.

 

Scientists now say that not only did the universe manifest spontaneously out of the emptiness or void, but that a void must necessarily generate such events as the big bang from random quantum vacuum fluctuations.

 

The void gave birth to all that exists.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_particle

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation

 

http://www.amazon.com/Universe-Nothing-There-Something-Rather/dp/145162445X

 

Edited April 20, 2012 by More_Pie_Guy

[goldisheavy]

I believe God is that which truly exists, yet has no physical form, no tangible physical existence.

 

It is your consciousness, it is my consciousness, it is every beings consciousness.

 

I generally don't like to talk about God, because that concept brings more harm than good. However, if I am talking about God in a positive sense, then what you are saying above is exactly what I believe too.

 

It is both the origin and final destination of our minds, it was what we were one with before birth and shall be apart of again after death.

 

This I don't believe. I believe that most people don't return to the state of godliness upon death, nor is it the state they are born from. I believe in reincarnation. The state of godliness is nirvana, and has to be attained through intentional practice. It's not a default state for most beings, imo.

 

It is the empty void of space, and yet it is anything but empty. I believe it is an infinite mind, or infinite spirit, or infinite intelligence. However you wish to think of it.

 

Scientists now say that not only did the universe manifest spontaneously out of the emptiness or void, but that a void must necessarily generate such events as the big bang from random quantum vacuum fluctuations.

 

The void gave birth to all that exists.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_particle

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation

 

http://www.amazon.com/Universe-Nothing-There-Something-Rather/dp/145162445X

 

 

Science is pretty flexible and scientists always change their minds. There is a popular opinion that universes are bubbles that arise out of pre-existing other universes rather than being created from void. In this scenario there is never a void, except as a hypothetical state.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Bloody hell, that's brilliant where's it from?

 

I'm pretty sure they were both in "Touch the Earth" a compilation of Native American speeches, by TC McLuhan, now out of print but available online. There is more there too about silence being a cornerstone of integrity. I highly recommend the book. Some of the most powerful speeches, especially in regards to respecting nature. Seems like the sort of thing that would have been covered up by putting the publisher out of business.

[Thunder_Gooch]

This I don't believe. I believe that most people don't return to the state of godliness upon death, nor is it the state they are born from. I believe in reincarnation. The state of godliness is nirvana, and has to be attained through intentional practice. It's not a default state for most beings, imo.

 

Well I guess you are right on this, but it's the end destination. I believe in rebirth too. Rebirth is what I am trying to prevent.

Edited April 20, 2012 by More_Pie_Guy

[goldisheavy]

Well I guess you are right on this, but it's the end destination. I believe in rebirth too. Rebirth is what I am trying to prevent.

 

Then we're mostly in agreement. Except I want a bit more control/influence in my rebirths, rather than outright cessation. One has to be seriously fed up with sentient living to want to permanently get off the wheel. I think maybe I would enjoy a break from limited sentience, but eventually I'd want to be reborn as a relatively limited being. I just don't want to be as limited as I am now (or more accurately, as I experience myself to be).

[C T]

"I was born in Nun before the sky existed, before the Earth existed,

before that which was to be made form existed,

before turmoil existed,

before that fear which arose on account of the Eye of Horus existed".

(Pyramid texts, utterance 486 - ca 2300 BCE)

 

 

 

Interestingly, below is a comparative 'utterance' from the Rig Veda:

 

"There was neither non-existence nor existence then;

there was neither the realm of space nor the sky which is beyond.

What stirred?

Where?

In whose protection?

Was there water, bottomlessly deep?

 

There was neither death nor immortality then.

There was no distinguishing sign of night nor of day.

That one breathed, windless, by its own impulse.

Other than that, there was nothing beyond."

(Rig Veda - Creation Hymn - Nasadiya 1-2)

 

 

In what context should one view the "I" in the Pyramid text above?

 

Thanks.

[Apech]

CT,

 

I love you. I love anyone who gives me a chance to talk about the Pyramid Texts!!!!!

 

Having got my joy out of the way here's the answer.

 

The 'subject' of the Pyramid Texts is the 'dead' king. The texts can be loosely be divided into those texts which describe things done for the king (like providing him with food and so on) and those in which the king speaks for himself. This is one of the latter ... so the person speaking as 'I' is the king. HOWEVER .... in the Pyramid Texts and in later times in the Coffin Texts and the Book of the Dead the deceased who is termed the Osiris N (where N is his name) identifies themselves with major deities who take part in cosmic events such as creation ... so the voice is both the individual (you or me) and the god.

 

I am not at home so I cannot check which Pyramid this utterance is from and its context but I imagine that the one born in Nun is Atum.

 

Nun is the great void or abyss (pralaya) (said to be watery, dark, infinite, hidden) and Atum (whose name comes from the root 'tm' meaning 'complete') is called Neb-er-djer which means literally 'Lord to the limit' or often translated as Lord of All. Atum was sometimes seen as a great serpent which moved in the waters of Nun and created the world by circling in on himself (cf. Ouroborus) ... Atum generates the air and moisture (Shu and Tefnut) who are male and female polarities (cp. yin and yang) who in turn generate Nut (the sky) and Geb (the earth) ... thus bringing about the basic structure of the world.

 

What essentially is happening with the "I" is that the king is recognizing his own nature to be not different to the absolute. He is assuming his own place among the gods ... or in fact as 'greater' than the gods. In another text he says "Atum is my father and I am greater than he!"

 

Hope this makes sense.

Edited April 26, 2012 by Apech
rubbish typing

[C T]

CT,

 

I love you. I love anyone who gives me a chance to talk about the Pyramid Texts!!!!!

 

Having got my joy out of the way here's the answer.

 

The 'subject' of the Pyramid Texts is the 'dead' king. The texts can be loosely be divided into those texts which describe things done for the king (like providing him with food and so on) and those in which the king speaks for himself. This is one of the latter ... so the person speaking as 'I' is the king. HOWEVER .... in the Pyramid Texts and in later times in the Coffin Texts and the Book of the Dead the deceased who is termed the Osiris N (where N is his name) identifies themselves with major deities who take part in cosmic events such as creation ... so the voice is both the individual (you or me) and the god.

 

I am not at home so I cannot check which Pyramid this utterance is from and its context but I imagine that the one born in Nun is Atum.

 

Nun is the great void or abyss (pralaya) (said to be watery, dark, infinite, hidden) and Atum (whose name comes from the root 'tm' meaning 'complete') is called Neb-er-djer which means literally 'Lord to the limit' or often translated as Lord of All. Atum was sometimes seen as a great serpent which moved in the waters of Nun and created the world by circling in on himself (cf. Ouroborus) ... Atum generates the air and moisture (Shu and Tefnut) who are male and female polarities (cp. yin and yang) who in tern generate Nut (the sky) and Geb (the earth) ... thus bringing about the basic structure of the world.

 

What essentially is happening with the "I" is that the king is recognizing his own nature to be not different to the absolute. He is assuming his own place among the gods ... or in fact as 'greater' than the gods. In another text he says "Atum is my father and I am greater than he!"

 

Hope this makes sense.

WoW! Very clear, cheers, A!!

 

(...and to think you recalled all this from memory makes me all envious! )

 

-- salutes --