true names of God(s), Demons etc

[Daniel]

18 hours ago, Cobie said:

 

Edited August 9 by Daniel

[Cobie]

.

Edited August 9 by Cobie

[Daniel]

8 hours ago, snowymountains said:

Does any scripture cite or imply that Nachash may pretend to be Metatron, at least during first contact?

 

Yes.  Implied..  Nachash and Moshiach are equivalent gematria.

 

8 hours ago, snowymountains said:

Also how does Shechinah differ from Metatron, other than the direction of the chariot.

 

Think of it like the pony express? 

 

Shechina picks up the passengers and delivers any parcels ( blessings ) on earth from the HQ ( God ) that were received while the chariot is in heaven.  Shechina is the feminine principle.  Shechina is the will of God in the form of: welcoming, delivers blessings, miracles, healing, etc.  

 

Metatron is the will of God in the form of a masculine principle.  Metatron delivers the passengers to the "foot stool of God" where they can petition the All-Mighty or plea their case before the divine authority.  Metatron also receives directives of divine will from the God-head and distributes the orders ( law ) to the hosts. 

 

If those directives are blessings, healings, prophecy, miracles etc, Metatron delivers them, but not as Metatron.  It's Shechina.  Not because it's two different angels.  That's just how it naturally appears when it is executing those tasks from the earth bound perspective.  That's what the back side of the chariot "looks" like.  But that's the only side that can be "seen" from earth.

 

Imagine a giant VW mini van?  Huge.  The size of North America?  The back half of it, like a UFO, is poking out of a cloud in the sky?  From the ground, looking up, it looks like VW minivan.  However, on the other side of the cloud, up above it?  Beyond the range of vision of an individual on the ground?  Guess what?  It's a Ford F150.  It's like that.  The back half is Shechina.   The front half is Metatron.  No one sees Metatron from earth.  They only see Shechina because that's the aspect which is operating in this realm.

 

The other major distinction involves a somewhat bizarre concept known as the Ikahr.  Pronounced Ee-car.

 

Edited August 9 by Daniel

[Daniel]

13 hours ago, snowymountains said:

So is the welcoming side appearing to those who meet him and the other side/Shechinah appears to those who reject contact with him/move away from him?

 

No.  Nothing like that.

 

It's a chariot.  A train car on a circular track.  If you miss the train ( or reject it ) just catch the next one.  It's on a looping schedule.

 

13 hours ago, snowymountains said:

How does Nachash relate to Metatron-and-Shechinah ?

 

See below.  

 

13 hours ago, snowymountains said:

I can only guess on the opposite of a chariot

 

good guess

 

That's the relationship between Nachash and Metatron-and-Shechinah.  Nachash is the opposite of Metatron-and-Shechinah.

Nachash is the opposite of The, capital T, chariot.

 

13 hours ago, snowymountains said:

not travelling/journeying, remaining grounded on Earth.

 

Bingo.  The opposite of a chariot is stuck or.... going nowhere fast.  Riding around in circles, or chaotic nonsense, or running out of gas at random intervals, while simultaneously making little bits of progress here and there in order to evade any desire to get off the train, look at a map or ask for directions from the locals.

 

That's Nachash, a trickster, con artist , snake-oil-salesperson.  However sometimes Nachash is useful.  It's takes a their to catch a thief.  The best example is probably Robin Hood.  Many From that valence, though , it's not Nachash, it's Dan ( pronounced dahn, like dahn-tien  ).

 

Edited August 9 by Daniel

[Daniel]

9 hours ago, snowymountains said:

Does any scripture cite or imply that Nachash may pretend to be Metatron, at least during first contact?

 

Ah.  Remember what I mentioned about the complimentary inverse?  It will also resonate with the traveler if they are inclined to the direct correspondence?  Remember how I mentioned that the fault condition happens often?  I think this is what you're observing.  

 

There's a one to many relationship between a direct correspondence to a divinity and the inverse complimentary divinity ( "spirit" ).  Think of it this way?  You're walking on a street headed towards your home.  When you get to your house, how many other homes did you pass along the way?  There are many other homes in relation to the one house that's yours.  That's the one-to-many relationship.

 

The dark trickster is everywhere, in everything, to a degree.  It's a fundamental motivating influence, arguably one of the most virile.  Because of this, an individual is much more likely, by many orders of magnitude, to encounter many various and repeating forms of tricksters before they encounter a warrior-healer to emulate.

 

Edited August 9 by Daniel

[snowymountains]

Thanks @Daniel, will read more thoroughly when I have proper access to internet.

 

Two questions,

 

One, could it be ( in that is that implicit in scripture?) that it is men who see the female form and women would see the male form?

 

Two, I'm not the one who met the trickster, I don't believe one needs to meet them, at least this particular trickster.

In my case it was a "direct" connection to warrior-healer archetype, when I was ready for it at least and it sort of just happened, wasn't trying to connect to anything. "My" warrior-healer is not from an abrahamic tradition, but some time before that happened I did very politely send away, another trickster, Lilith ( Cybele to be more precise) in a dream and was wondering where did that come from and eas surprised that what I saw was depicted in ancient art. For me the Lilith encounter was followed by zero synchronicities, it was just a very polite in-dream "I'm not interested, thanks but no". It somehow feels like sending away the trickster though was a prerequisite for the warrior-healer to appear some time later on.

 

Someone else though, a long time ago, did "meet" that trickster who was introduced to them as Metatron ( the said person didn't even know what/who Metatron is, Metatron revealed the name ). That person also has zero psychotic incidents ( including the "meeting" ), that I can confirm 100% and I take their word at face value.

Someone can get "rid off" the trickster but affirming no contact is welcome combined with grounding to 5 senses. It took them though 30-40 days of very very unpleasant synchronicities for that particular trickster to "leave" with that recipe.

 

My question is spiritually/from scripture, what is the "recipe" of dealing with the trickster, after they've been introduced as Metatron? That's why I've got a stickie for Metatron btw, to see what other ways there are to send the trickster-masquarading-as-metatron away, as I found that incident intriguing ( affirmations plus grounding worked great for that person, it took a some time though)

Edited August 9 by snowymountains

[Daniel]

7 hours ago, snowymountains said:

One, could it be ( in that is that implicit in scripture?) that it is men who see the female form and women would see the male form?

 

No.  King David spoke to Him.  Hannah spoke to Him.  Spoke, but didn't see.  Because He is distant.

 

The one with the clearest vision, so far, is Moses who saw the chariot carrying "Glory in the feminine form".  Moses got the closest to it, by going up on the mountain.  But he was still earth-bound.  That's why he's the best example in regard to how earth-bound individuals will encounter the chariot ( Metatron-and-Shechina, in my culture it is abbreviated Z"A, we say it like this:  "The Zah" or mor formally the "mercavah"  )

 

7 hours ago, snowymountains said:

Two, I'm not the one who met the trickster, I don't believe one needs to meet them, at least this particular trickster.

In my case it was a "direct" connection to warrior-healer archetype, when I was ready for it at least and it sort of just happened, wasn't trying to connect to anything. "My" warrior-healer is not from an abrahamic tradition, but some time before that happened I did very politely send away, another trickster, Lilith ( Cybele to be more precise) in a dream and was wondering where did that come from and eas surprised that what I saw was depicted in ancient art. For me the Lilith encounter was followed by zero synchronicities, it was just a very polite in-dream "I'm not interested, thanks but no". It somehow feels like sending away the trickster though was a prerequisite for the warrior-healer to appear some time later on.

 

Got it.  ~thumbs-up~  I don't see a question here, but, it sounds like you're asking about the necessity for sending away the trickster?  Sure.  If they're literally flip-sides of the same coin, one would need to flip the coin over to see the other side.  All angels and demons are like this.  They're conjoined twins.  But not at all identical, they're nested inverses.  Like a Russian doll?  The wooden ones?  That come in a set?  Each one nesting in the next?  If you take one of those dolls? The outer dimension is a conjoined twin of its inner dimension.  Each and every angel has a conjoined twin, it's complimentary inverse which is commonly referred to as a demon.  Calling an angel is calling a demon and vice versa.  Seeking a warrior-healer will also bring it's inverse.  Calling for Eve will also bring Lillith, etc...  And, for the reasons I wrote about earlier, when a person is seeing Eve, their odds of encountering Lilith increase dramatically.

 

7 hours ago, snowymountains said:

Someone else though, a long time ago, did "meet" that trickster who was introduced to them as Metatron ( the said person didn't even know what/who Metatron is, Metatron revealed the name ). That person also has zero psychotic incidents ( including the "meeting" ), that I can confirm 100% and I take their word at face value.

 

I call that one:  Loki.  From the norse pantheon.  There's a Hebrew equivalent, but "Loki" captures it for me.  

 

7 hours ago, snowymountains said:

My question is spiritually/from scripture, what is the "recipe" of dealing with the trickster, after they've been introduced as Metatron?

 

Good question.  The only way to deal with Loki is to ignore him.  You're basically using his own tools against him.  In Hebrew scripture, Loki is known as the twin-serpent "Chaos-and-Void".  "Void" is self-defeating.  That's how to deal with Loki.

 

7 hours ago, snowymountains said:

That's why I've got a stickie for Metatron btw, to see what other ways there are to send the trickster-masquarading-as-metatron away, as I found that incident intriguing ( affirmations plus grounding worked great for that person, it took a some time though)

 

~nods~  Whatever works, bro.  Any port in a storm...

 

[Daniel]

On 8/8/2024 at 6:30 AM, snowymountains said:

 

🙏👍

 

I was wrong.  Again.  Sorry.  

 

Gee whiz.  I played around with the pronunciation of Y'hoshua Ben Nuhn.  I am so sorry.  It is not y'HOshoe-uh.  The final vowel is wrong.  y'HOshu-ah, not "-uh", it's "ah" it's called a patach.  The difference is minor, but important.  The jaw is lower and relaxed for "-ah".  It is contrasted with "-eh" "-uh" and "-aw".  Sorry.  All this talk of masculine and feminine made me realize the mistake.  

 

y + glottal stop + HO + shoo + ah 

 

"HO" is masculine and distant.

"ah" is feminine and proximal.

both are needed.

 

"eh" and "uh" are masculine, not feminine, that's a significant difference in the pronunciation of the true name.

 

Edited August 9 by Daniel

[Apech]

On 08/08/2024 at 3:33 PM, snowymountains said:

 

I haven't read all of it, what I had read was good, though I also recall scholars being critical of some of the content.

So it's one of those books which I'm happy to recommend as long as content is taken with a grain of salt.

 

This book is part of another project, I'm trying to figure how much of Tibetan practices are of Shamanic origin, but let's leave that for another thread 🧵 ( fyi I haven't concluded in either way being/not-being of shamanic origin )

 
Have you read ‘Civilized Shamans’  by Samuel?

[snowymountains]

3 hours ago, Apech said:

 
Have you read ‘Civilized Shamans’  by Samuel?

 

I have not, but it looks very interesting and it's focused on this very topic. Thanks for mentioning it 👍

[snowymountains]

6 hours ago, Daniel said:

 

No.  King David spoke to Him.  Hannah spoke to Him.  Spoke, but didn't see.  Because He is distant.

 

The one with the clearest vision, so far, is Moses who saw the chariot carrying "Glory in the feminine form".  Moses got the closest to it, by going up on the mountain.  But he was still earth-bound.  That's why he's the best example in regard to how earth-bound individuals will encounter the chariot ( Metatron-and-Shechina, in my culture it is abbreviated Z"A, we say it like this:  "The Zah" or mor formally the "mercavah"  )

 

Thanks, this is very interesting, what reads do you recommend someone who wants learn more about mercavah, but not become a practitioner?

 

6 hours ago, Daniel said:

 Sure.  If they're literally flip-sides of the same coin, one would need to flip the coin over to see the other side.  All angels and demons are like this.  They're conjoined twins.  But not at all identical, they're nested inverses.  Like a Russian doll?  The wooden ones?  That come in a set?  Each one nesting in the next?  If you take one of those dolls? The outer dimension is a conjoined twin of its inner dimension.  Each and every angel has a conjoined twin, it's complimentary inverse which is commonly referred to as a demon.  Calling an angel is calling a demon and vice versa.  Seeking a warrior-healer will also bring it's inverse.  Calling for Eve will also bring Lillith, etc...  And, for the reasons I wrote about earlier, when a person is seeing Eve, their odds of encountering Lilith increase dramatically.

 

I see the syzygies in a somewhat different way.

One there's usually a syzygy of archetypes for a symbol ( e.g. a snake can represent either a corruptor or knowledge ).

Two there is a progression of archetypes, so in that sense one archetype may be "bound" to another one, but each one of us has their unique progression so syzygies may not be universal in that for different persons maybe syzygies are different.

 

So eg politely avoiding Lilith may be succeeded by different archetypes for different people.

 

6 hours ago, Daniel said:

I call that one:  Loki.  From the norse pantheon.  There's a Hebrew equivalent, but "Loki" captures it for me.  

 

 

Good question.  The only way to deal with Loki is to ignore him.  You're basically using his own tools against him.  In Hebrew scripture, Loki is known as the twin-serpent "Chaos-and-Void".  "Void" is self-defeating.  That's how to deal with Loki.

 

Who is the Hebrew equivalent of Loki ? 

[Daniel]

On 8/9/2024 at 2:44 PM, snowymountains said:

Thanks, this is very interesting, what reads do you recommend someone who wants learn more about mercavah, but not become a practitioner?

 

None.  It's not written anywhere.  It's literally prohibited to write about it in the Talmud.  The only written works I'm aware of are total rubbish.  I only recently rec'd permission to write about it in May.

 

On 8/9/2024 at 2:44 PM, snowymountains said:

syzygies

 

Apologies.  I've never seen or heard this word before.

 

On 8/9/2024 at 2:44 PM, snowymountains said:

Two there is a progression of archetypes, so in that sense one archetype may be "bound" to another one, but each one of us has their unique progression so syzygies may not be universal in that for different persons maybe syzygies are different.

 

I don't know.  My struggle with this is, I cannot imagine there being any rigid progression that doesn't have beaucoup outliers and exceptions.  And if that's the case, I find very little use in adopting anyone else's individualization progression for myself or others.

 

On the other hand, people who are raised in the same cultural context, who have weathered the same "storms", perhaps not in magnitude, but in general form?  Yes, maybe, that collective group would all generally benefit from a similar progression.  Again, I don't know.  It seems to me it's better to set aside any and all preconceived notions in these matters other than remaining focused on the desired outcome.

 

On 8/9/2024 at 2:44 PM, snowymountains said:

So eg politely avoiding Lilith may be succeeded by different archetypes for different people.

 

To be complete?... And for some people?  Lilith is exactly what's needed for that individual in that place and time.  I hope you agree.

 

On 8/9/2024 at 2:44 PM, snowymountains said:

Who is the Hebrew equivalent of Loki ? 

 

It's best known in ( I think? ) the akkadian dialect:  Leviathan.  Technically:  

 

לויתן נחש ברח ו'לויתן נחש עקלתון

 

"LeevyahSAHN NaCHaSH BahREEach V'LeevyahSAHN NaCHaSH ahkahLAWsohn"

 

Isaiah 27:1

Psalms 74:14

Psalms 104:26

Job 3:8 

Job 40:25

 

 

Edited August 11 by Daniel

[snowymountains]

7 hours ago, Daniel said:

 

None.  It's not written anywhere.  It's literally prohibited to write about it in the Talmud.  The only written works I'm aware of are total rubbish.  I only recently rec'd permission to write about it in May.

I see, wishing good luck with the approval 👍. If you do get an approval, please do drop a note when the book is out.

 

7 hours ago, Daniel said:

Apologies.  I've never seen or heard this word before.

 

It means a formed pair.

 

7 hours ago, Daniel said:

I don't know.  My struggle with this is, I cannot imagine there being any rigid progression that doesn't have beaucoup outliers and exceptions.  And if that's the case, I find very little use in adopting anyone else's individualization progression for myself or others.

 

I'd go as far as to say there's no progression that fits all people. Everyone's progression is highly individualised.

 

7 hours ago, Daniel said:

 

To be complete?... And for some people?  Lilith is exactly what's needed for that individual in that place and time.  I hope you agree.

 

 

For some yes, for some not.

Again, it's highly individualised, depends on the dream.

For some Lilith's archetype may be exactly what's needed to be integrated, depends on how they relate to women and what perception they have of their partner too.

In my case Lilith was a luring to go off-track ( external interpretation of the dream ) and staying in-track instead ( which I did unconsciously/in-dream) is what unlocked at a much later time the warrior-healer archetype.

It all depends on context, can't make a generic Lilith is good/bad comment.

 

7 hours ago, Daniel said:

It's best known in ( I think? ) the akkadian dialect:  Leviathan.  Technically:  

 

לויתן נחש ברח ו'לויתן נחש עקלתון

 

"Leev'ahSAHN NaCHaSH BahREEach V'Leev'ahSAHN NaCHaSH ahkahLAWsohn"

 

Isaiah 27:1

Psalms 74:14

Psalms 104:26

Job 3:8 

Job 40:25

 

 

 

Thank you 👍 😊 

Edited August 10 by snowymountains

[Daniel]

6 hours ago, snowymountains said:

Lilith was a luring to go off-track

 

That's what she does.... to men.

 

6 hours ago, snowymountains said:

For some Lilith's archetype may be exactly what's needed

 

It seems Lilith is more often needed for women as a source of strength and independence in a predominantly masculine power structure.

 

6 hours ago, snowymountains said:

Thank you 👍 😊

 

You're very welcome.

 

 

Edited August 10 by Daniel

[snowymountains]

23 hours ago, Daniel said:

It seems Lilith is more often needed for women as a source of strength and independence in a predominantly masculine power structure.

 

For men too, if they have trouble accepting a woman's wilder side.

It comes down to whether the internal/symbolic interpretation of the dream or the external interpretation is the one conveying the strongest message.

[Cobie]

 

On 07/08/2024 at 6:58 PM, Daniel said:

… every question is an opportunity …

 

9 hours ago, Daniel said:

… The question is the answer.

 

A sales trainer (J. Douglas Edwards, active 1960's to 1980's) said ‘Questions are the Answers’ and ‘Obstacles are Opportunities’.

 

Edited August 11 by Cobie

[Daniel]

2 hours ago, Cobie said:

 

 

 

A sales trainer (J. Douglas Edwards) said ‘Questions are the Answers’ and ‘Obstacles are Opportunities’. (disdain emoji)

 

 

 

Can we see the "J. Douglas Edwards" quote?

 

Are we wrong?

 

 

[Daniel]

2 hours ago, Cobie said:

J. Douglas Edwards

 

His books and memorabilia are rare and collectable?

 

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=j+douglas+edwards&_trksid=p2334524.m4084.l1311&_odkw=sales+closing+power&_sacat=0

[Daniel]

3 hours ago, Cobie said:

Questions are the Answers’

 

 

 

https://mitsloan.mit.edu/centers-initiatives/mit-leadership-center/our-people-mit-leadership-center

 

 

Edited August 11 by Daniel

[Daniel]

3 hours ago, Cobie said:

Questions are the Answers

 

Questions Are The Answer - Myron Golden PHD

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyuC1GaOltY  ( there is a discussion of names starting around 18:30 )

 

 

https://biblehub.com/proverbs/2-4.htm

 

" ... and if you look for it as for silver and search for it as for hidden treasure ... "

" ... then you will understand the fear of the LORD and find the knowledge of God."

 

Edited August 11 by Daniel

[Daniel]

3 hours ago, Cobie said:

disdain emoji

 

Cobie, you asked me to explain in terms that a 4 year old would understand.  So I employed a technique which would be acceptable by a four year old.  At the time you appreciated it.  Your disdain is misplaced.  Yes, I had a plan and it's a good technique.  My very next reply incorporated this idea about questioning in a completely original manner.  I challenge you to find anyone who has brought together those ideas in the way that I did.

 

Here is a link to my post in case anyone would like to read it themself and check to see if anyone else anywhere has written anything like it.  I haven't heard of any of these motivation speakers before.  But, I like Myron Golden, PHD.  You might like him too.

 

 

Edited August 11 by Daniel

[Daniel]

On 8/7/2024 at 5:38 AM, Daniel said:

But wait! That’s not the entire secret. I'm sorry.  No, no, I’m not saying it right. I’m sorry, this is important. I need to say it correctly.  Please.  ~shaking my head~   OK. ~deep-breath~  OK.  Yes. Good.  Here we go. Ready? The entire secret is told like this:

 

1) Every question is an opportunity.

2) Big questions are big opportunities.

3) The biggest question is the biggest opportunity.

 

@Cobie

 

See above and look at #3.

 

Now see below.  I rest my case.

 

Edited August 11 by Daniel

[Apech]

4 minutes ago, Daniel said:

 

@Cobie

 

See above and look at #3.

 

Now see below.  I rest my case.

 

Don’t waste your time Daniel.

[Daniel]

1 hour ago, Apech said:

Don’t waste your time Daniel.

 

I learn a lot from opposition. 

[Cobie]

10 hours ago, Daniel said:

I learn a lot from opposition. 

 

To learn, 
One accumulates day by day.

To study Tao, 
One reduces day by day. 

 

DDJ 48

為 學 日 益 為 道 日 損

wei2 xue2 ri4 yi4 wei2 dao4 ri4 sun3 

(WB, translation Chung Yuan Chang)

 

 

Edited August 12 by Cobie