Kabbalah And Mormonism

[volgadon]

Wade,

2 questions

1.) Do you object if we continue to develop this thought here or would you rather we start a new thread?

2.) Does anyone know if it is possible to attach an image to a post. It would greatly aid my effort.

BTW, I'm reading a Morrocan book on the Sefirot, so looking forward to the discussion.

[volgadon]

Back to R. Nachman and Wittgenstein's dynamic silence, I think it interesting to compare them to what we know of Euripides' "Bellerophon." Driven to despair by the issue of wicked men prospering and the pious suffering, Bellerophon ascends into heaven (whether to confront the gods or to show that they aren't there, we don't know) but is destroyed, IE, meets his death. R. Nachman proposed that one adopt silence in order to prevent a similar outcome. In this he was basing himself on a midrahsic account of Moses. Great minds think alike is what I want to say.

[wenglund]

Wade,

2 questions

1.) Do you object if we continue to develop this thought here or would you rather we start a new thread?

2.) Does anyone know if it is possible to attach an image to a post. It would greatly aid my effort.

I don't object in the least to you developing this thought.

And, if the image you wish to post is online somewhere, then just click on the [image button] in the editing tool and insert the url where that image is located (right-click on the image at its current location, and click on "properties," and then copy the url from there). If the image is not online, then you may have to upload it to an image hosting web site.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[SamIam]

I used the plain speech of modern revelation to find the mysteries of God hidden in the symbolism of the distant past--mysteries that I believe have been hidden even from Kabbalists, who while very fond of anthropomorphic imagery in relation to God, "repeatedly warn and stress the need to divorce their notions from any corporality, dualism, plurality, or spatial and temporal connotations." (url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sephirot#The_Man-metaphor_in_Kabbalah]Wikipedia: Kabbalah)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Wade et all

I have considered this statement and even started to work on a response. I am always compelled to give full and complete responses and that is time consuming. Still I don't want to let the possibilities this statement provides for discussion be lost.

mysteries that I believe have been hidden even from Kabbalists, who while very fond of anthropomorphic imagery in relation to God, "repeatedly warn and stress the need to divorce their notions from any corporality, dualism, plurality, or spatial and temporal connotations

The knowledge of the Kabbalists from my perspective is never complete and if we stay within the context of when the Kabbalists timeline of when they actually put pen to paper...The original true Kabbalists - The Fathers from Adam down to Jacob and perhaps a few others thereafter passed a majority of their knowledge down in the oral tradition. Not just the identified oral tradition of the Talmud, Mishnah, and Midrash but the oral history that predates these writings. Interestingly, we have an oral tradition in the Church --in the temple ordinances. Highly esoteric information that is not intended for dissemination in a written record. I have long wondered if that was why the nature of Kabbalism deals in subjects central to creation. I have found so many parallels that I am convinced it is so.

However by the time they got to the point of recording it they had already lost the spirit of their work enough that they began to record that which previously was too sacred to be part of a written record. This also suffered from philosophies creeping into the mix. So from even before that point it begins to decay and suffer from the absence of the priesthood and gifts of the spirit. However, what was recorded I feel was tangents, bits and pieces, remnants of temple material. Some I believe are reasonably expansive but by this time having lost some core perspectives in the nature of the Messiah they become jumbled up so to speak…anyway to my question. Do you and others see it as possible that this distance between the LDS anthropomorphic imagery and the stressing of “the need to divorce their notions from any corporality, dualism, plurality, or spatial and temporal connotations” is actually material from different perspectives of an infinite God. For myself I have felt that if we look for the common ground and then apply the restored gospel standards there is actually much compatible material and it is much like the opposing sides of the same coin. I find that looking at it this way really does create a more scripturally, LDS theologically consistent being than a purely anthropomorphic image conveys.

[wenglund]

Wade et all

I have considered this statement and even started to work on a response. I am always compelled to give full and complete responses and that is time consuming. Still I don't want to let the possibilities this statement provides for discussion be lost.

mysteries that I believe have been hidden even from Kabbalists, who while very fond of anthropomorphic imagery in relation to God, "repeatedly warn and stress the need to divorce their notions from any corporality, dualism, plurality, or spatial and temporal connotations

The knowledge of the Kabbalists from my perspective is never complete and if we stay within the context of when the Kabbalists timeline of when they actually put pen to paper...The original true Kabbalists - The Fathers from Adam down to Jacob and perhaps a few others thereafter passed a majority of their knowledge down in the oral tradition. Not just the identified oral tradition of the Talmud, Mishnah, and Midrash but the oral history that predates these writings. Interestingly, we have an oral tradition in the Church --in the temple ordinances. Highly esoteric information that is not intended for dissemination in a written record. I have long wondered if that was why the nature of Kabbalism deals in subjects central to creation. I have found so many parallels that I am convinced it is so.

However by the time they got to the point of recording it they had already lost the spirit of their work enough that they began to record that which previously was too sacred to be part of a written record. This also suffered from philosophies creeping into the mix. So from even before that point it begins to decay and suffer from the absence of the priesthood and gifts of the spirit. However, what was recorded I feel was tangents, bits and pieces, remnants of temple material. Some I believe are reasonably expansive but by this time having lost some core perspectives in the nature of the Messiah they become jumbled up so to speak…anyway to my question. Do you and others see it as possible that this distance between the LDS anthropomorphic imagery and the stressing of “the need to divorce their notions from any corporality, dualism, plurality, or spatial and temporal connotations” is actually material from different perspectives of an infinite God. For myself I have felt that if we look for the common ground and then apply the restored gospel standards there is actually much compatible material and it is much like the opposing sides of the same coin. I find that looking at it this way really does create a more scripturally, LDS theologically consistent being than a purely anthropomorphic image conveys.

If I understand correctly, Kabbalists need to divorce themselves from those anthropomorphic notions because they reject the idea of God as anthropomorphic, purely or otherwise. This, I believe, is contrary to how the ancient prophets believed (see the posts by maklelan in the Anthropomorphism thread). So, it isn't two sides of the same coin, but one side rejecting the other.

This doesn't mean that we LDS don't have anything to learn from Kabbalah. I believe we do--if nothing more than it may help orient our Western, literal-thinking minds more towards symbolic forms of learning and may help us to better detect artifacts of the gospel from the distant past (though, like Bill, I now question whether Kabbalah, itself, is all that ancient).

Yet, one may also, and perhaps better derive this symbolic learning by attending the temple and reading, under the tutelage of the Spirit, the scriptures from the ancient past.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[mfbukowski]

This doesn't mean that we LDS don't have anything to learn from Kabbalah. I believe we do--if nothing more than it may help orient our Western, literal-thinking minds more towards symbolic forms of learning and may help us to better detect artifacts of the gospel from the distant past (though, like Bill, I now question whether Kabbalah, itself, is all that ancient).

Yet, one may also, and perhaps better derive this symbolic learning by attending the temple and reading, under the tutelage of the Spirit, the scriptures from the ancient past.

Couldn't agree more- I was going to post a similar comment last evening but then life intruded and I never got to it! I think that learning Kabbalah as a method of "seeing" is a very valuable way to upgrade our skills for understanding the temple and other symbolic thought vocabularies. I am not sure about the "content" of what it teaches, since I think that manifests itself in a very Jewish way of seeing the world, but it is truly incredible in its exploration of all way ways symbols may be overlayed to express meanings and connections which cannot be communicated verbally

To me that is the essence- by seeing many layers of meaning at once, non-verbally, we have a methodology which can bring us all closer to God.

[wenglund]

Couldn't agree more- I was going to post a similar comment last evening but then life intruded and I never got to it! I think that learning Kabbalah as a method of "seeing" is a very valuable way to upgrade our skills for understanding the temple and other symbolic thought vocabularies. I am not sure about the "content" of what it teaches, since I think that manifests itself in a very Jewish way of seeing the world, but it is truly incredible in its exploration of all way ways symbols may be overlayed to express meanings and connections which cannot be communicated verbally

To me that is the essence- by seeing many layers of meaning at once, non-verbally, we have a methodology which can bring us all closer to God.

Yeeeuup.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[SamIam]

This doesn't mean that we LDS don't have anything to learn from Kabbalah. I believe we do--if nothing more than it may help orient our Western, literal-thinking minds more towards symbolic forms of learning and may help us to better detect artifacts of the gospel from the distant past (though, like Bill, I now question whether Kabbalah, itself, is all that ancient).

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Some good observations but I begin to despair... I have much more to add but I am working on the introduction material to make the leap from 10 Sefirot to the Kingdom of God diagram. I am finding it tedious as I feel compelled to make the connective reasoning as apparant as I can without sacrificing my effort entirely for the absence of the connective material.

That said, I will add one thought. The Book of Abraham serves as one of the finest examples we have where material that is now considered Kabballah has been cleansed and reads much more pleasantly after the themes of the restoration. (if that seems doubtful I am working on this in the material to be posted soon) It is an error, in my opinion to not realize that the origin material of that we now call Kabbalah is so much older than the official dates of the written material. The Book of Abraham proves that. We use the term Kabbalah to describe all Jewish mystic writings as there is no vocabulary to describe Kabbalah before Kabbalah that I am aware of. Educate me and I will use that jargon. I can't understand why we don't make the connection...Several have commented to the temple allusions in Kabbalah and we are well informed that:

"From the days of Adam to the present, whenever the Lord has had a people on earth, temples and temple ordinances have been a crowning feature of their worship. 'My people are always commanded to build' temples, the Lord says, 'for the glory, honor, and endowment' of all the saints. (D. & C. 124:39-40.) (McConkie, Doctrinal New Testament Commentary)

The Book of Abraham as one witness and now Bruce R. McConkie as another. There is a talk by Boyd K. Packer, it is titled "To the all Church Coordinating Council." He expresses a concept in this quote that is very significant:

(After his calling to supervisor of Seminaries and Institutes of Religion)... Elder Lee had agreed to give me counsel and some direction. He didn't say much, nothing really in detail, but what he told me has saved me time and time again. "You must decide now which way you face," he said. "Either you represent the teachers and students and champion their causes or you represent the Brethren who appointed you. You need to decide now which way you face." then he added, "some of your predecessors faced the wrong way." It took some hard and painful lessons before I understood his counsel. In time, I did understand, and my resolve to face the right way became irreversible."

This is a prinicple that can be extrapolated to serve in this instance. Let the Book of Abraham and let Bruce R. McConkie at least reopen your perspectives on this material and face for a bit longer in this endeavor towards a more open minded perspective than has swayed you thus far. Based on Elder McConkie’s spiritual insight, the obvious conclusion is that the origins of corrupted temple material that became categorized as Kabbalah must have predated the period of time which designates the inception of the official cannon of the Kabbalah. If we can see Kabbalah as material that is full of temple imagery can we not also make the next logical conclusion that it's origins must have been from a period where that same temple imagery was pure and undefiled? I consider it a tremendous mistake to not recognize the magnificence of Joseph Smith's effort, it's relationship to Jewish material of antiquity and the obvious connectivity that remains to other material that we now call Kabballah.

You are very correct that to orient our western brains to symbolic comprehension is a benefit of significance. However, in that very statement you commit yourself to wanting to make greater sense of the methods of prophecy amongst the Jews while looking through a foggy window of doubt that it will make much difference. I hope you will suspend that burgeoning sense of dismissal that seems to be growing and at least think through the logic I am presenting. Kabballah and the methods of the Jews that I am so fond of are not intended in any way to replace the spirit which we all hold paramount to understanding truth, only to supplement the effort. Let the exposure to these materials expand the realms your thoughts travel in and you will be rewarded for the effort.

[mfbukowski]

Can Kabbalah teach me something about the atonement?

Should we regard it as supplemental material or is it central to the gospel and necessary for my salvation and exaltation?

It seems we are not seeing those as central questions, because we do not want to offend each other. But acknowledging our differences is also important in seeing how we can indeed help each other. It helps us focus on areas where we have overlapping areas of concentration and not waste time where our efforts will not be fruitful.

I am personally drawn to esoteric ideas just because they are esoteric. Sometimes it is hard to determine if they are important and esoteric or just esoteric.

Just my opinion. I hope I have not been too direct.

[wenglund]

It is my belief that Christ heads his church and he will guide his chosen leaders in the way he wishes the church to go educationally. If Christ desires for the church to study Kabbalah or even the "prophesying of the Jews," then I would expect that his chosen leaders would be so directing. Since they aren't (at least not in any formal or substantive sense), this tells me that it isn't all that necessary or important to the spiritual progression of the general membership.

However, this doesn't mean that on a personal level some of us in the church cant derive some value in studying such things. Again, we may, though in a supplemental and intellectual way (as MFB intimated).

As such, I look forward to whatever Samlam or anyone else may have to offer here on the subject.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[SamIam]

It is my belief that Christ heads his church and he will guide his chosen leaders in the way he wishes the church to go educationally. If Christ desires for the church to study Kabbalah or even the "prophesying of the Jews," then I would expect that his chosen leaders would be so directing. Since they aren't (at least not in any formal or substantive sense), this tells me that it isn't all that necessary or important to the spiritual progression of the general membership.

However, this doesn't mean that on a personal level some of us in the church cant derive some value in studying such things. Again, we may, though in a supplemental and intellectual way (as MFB intimated).

As such, I look forward to whatever Samlam or anyone else may have to offer here on the subject.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I agree. Kabballah is not pertinant to understanding the atonement although it was during my study of the atonement that I made a some of my most significant connections. The thread however is Kabballah and Mormonism and I was hoping to constrain myself to respecting the subject at hand. Coincidently perhaps, I have come to the conclusion that my over zealousness might be misconstrued to indicate that I do not not appreciate the core doctrines of the church. My bottom line is I believe that my individual interests have lead me to an environment for which I am not well suited. As I mentioned I am not typcially an onliner, I do not frequent nor follow any of these arenas and feel that this form of exchange places me and perhaps even others at a disadvantage. I can't be brief in the developments of my topics for the concern that I will not make the case adequately, and yet this forum is not really conducive for my style of interaction. I do enjoy the give and take of people genuinely interested in sharing the gospel and yet in a venue such as this it is easy to become enmeshed in a posturing mentality which makes me feel uneasy. I remember trying this once before elsewhere and I wound up in a similar frame of mind. It has an edgy feel to it and that is not what I want to make others feel. It's probably just me so, as I said once before, I appreciate Wade gving me a one hour soap box - though I fear it has stretched on a bit to longer that is good. Thanks again for you interest.

[mfbukowski]

I agree. Kabballah is not pertinant to understanding the atonement although it was during my study of the atonement that I made a some of my most significant connections. The thread however is Kabballah and Mormonism and I was hoping to constrain myself to respecting the subject at hand. Coincidently perhaps, I have come to the conclusion that my over zealousness might be misconstrued to indicate that I do not not appreciate the core doctrines of the church. My bottom line is I believe that my individual interests have lead me to an environment for which I am not well suited. As I mentioned I am not typcially an onliner, I do not frequent nor follow any of these arenas and feel that this form of exchange places me and perhaps even others at a disadvantage. I can't be brief in the developments of my topics for the concern that I will not make the case adequately, and yet this forum is not really conducive for my style of interaction. I do enjoy the give and take of people genuinely interested in sharing the gospel and yet in a venue such as this it is easy to become enmeshed in a posturing mentality which makes me feel uneasy. I remember trying this once before elsewhere and I wound up in a similar frame of mind. It has an edgy feel to it and that is not what I want to make others feel. It's probably just me so, as I said once before, I appreciate Wade gving me a one hour soap box - though I fear it has stretched on a bit to longer that is good. Thanks again for you interest.

Well for the record I have enjoyed your posts and I certainly hope I didn't make you feel uncomfortable, and I really really hope you continue posting.

My comments were primarily for myself- "thinking out loud"- but in this case of course more "thinking with my fingers"

The board offers different options- don't know if you are aware of the "Focused Discussion" section, but that might be ideal for what you need

[volgadon]

Some good observations but I begin to despair... I have much more to add but I am working on the introduction material to make the leap from 10 Sefirot to the Kingdom of God diagram. I am finding it tedious as I feel compelled to make the connective reasoning as apparant as I can without sacrificing my effort entirely for the absence of the connective material.

I might not agree with all of it, but I am looking forward to your post. It will no doubt be very reasoned and reasonable. Writing substantive posts can get very tedious, I know, but don't despair.

[sbjazzman]

We LDS believe that the "future" mentioned in your comments is now in the distant past. We believe that the Messiah already came, and in connection with what you said above, "And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not." (Jn 1:5)

In a way, we now understand the "contraction." We have a sense for how, in one way, there is an "empty space" devoid of God, yet in another sense, God is there. To the blind, light may be all around them, but because they cannot see, then, for them, the light is not there, just darkness or emptiness.

This notion is significantly tied to the temple motif, particularly "the Veil," which we believe was wrent upon the death and resurrection of Christ, but I won't go into that now (particularly since there are other participants here far more knowledgeable on this topic).

Fun stuff, though.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

While you all might consider me a heretic among heretics when you see what I have to share from a Kabbalistic perpsepective. These links are from a forum I created to add additional insight to the book I wrote called Oracle of the Phoenix: Visionary Encounters with Radical Phoenix Lights. http://www.oracleofthephoenix.com/book.html the book is in final editing stages but I've made the pdf available for free right now.

First let's consider what the Kabbalist pointed out with the Vowel issue. For me it means that the Torah is a changing organism that must be reinterpreted for the times. See Infinite Torah at http://www.oracleofthephoenix.com/forum/6-kabbalah/53-infinite-torah.html

Next comes the heretical part. Yes the Messiah was created before or with the world but A. The Messiah is not Jesus from my viewpoint and I will show you why using the text but also using concepts from Kabbalah that have to remove us from a linear time construct. I know a great portion of Moromon theology comes from Isaiah and it is Isaiah that I consider in this post called Isaiah's Vision http://www.oracleofthephoenix.com/forum/5-phoenix-lights/46-isaiah-s-vision.html

Now I do believe that Jesus introduced the Christ Consciousness of Universal Love to the World and that Paul attempted to create a Loving Judaism for the Gentiles. I see that his ideas were hijacked by the institional forces of his time but he made his mission clear in Romans 11:11 that he was an apostle to the Gentiles and that Judasim was not to be superceded that at some point there would be a reconciliation.

It's best to read the book to get the context around these ideas and to read other posts in the forum. The book has a chapter on Kabbalah which is similar to what's writted in the prior posts but I've put my own spin these concepts to hopefully offer a more graphical depiction of what's being said.

[sbjazzman]

Getting back to comparing Kabbalah with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Duba mentioned this Kabbalistic belief:

Although we LDS believe in an anthropomorphic God, we also believe the scriptures that speak of God as being infinite and everywhere present.

One might well ask, how do we reconcile these two seemingly contradictory concepts--God being both finite and infinite?

Well, this is explained, metaphorically, in the creation narrative, when it states: "And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night..." (Gen. 1:16)

As you may recall, light was separated from darkness, or as Duba explained, the light was "contracted" to form the "empty space," heaven made way for earth. The light that rules the day, or in other words, the light that rules in heaven, the dwelling place of God, is the greater light we call the sun. The sun has a body of limited size, yet its light shines forth to fill the infinite expanse of the universe. To my way of thinking, the same is true for God--his light and spirit shine forth from his glorified and resurrected body to fill the expanses of space.

Understanding this may help us to grasp the "contraction," or the separation of light from darkness, heaven from earth, particularly the seemingly contradictory notion of God not being a part of the "empty space," but yet he is a part of "empty space"--he is present on earth.

How?

Well, again this may be explained, metaphorically, in the creation narrative. What is the greater light that rules the night?

The moon.

And, where does the moon get its light? From the sun.

So, even though the sun and its light aren't directly present during the night (or on earth), it is indirectly present by way of the moon.

If we consider God the Father to be symbolically represented by the sun, and God the Son to by symbolically represented by the moon, then this may bring a number of spiritually enlightening points to our understanding, not the least of which is that the Father is made present on earth by way of the Son.

I find this to be quite delicious.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

This article is one of my favorites in terms of understanding the duality in play http://www.oracleofthephoenix.com/forum/6-kabbalah/50-coincidence-of-opposites.html

[sbjazzman]

Can Kabbalah teach me something about the atonement?

Should we regard it as supplemental material or is it central to the gospel and necessary for my salvation and exaltation?

It seems we are not seeing those as central questions, because we do not want to offend each other. But acknowledging our differences is also important in seeing how we can indeed help each other. It helps us focus on areas where we have overlapping areas of concentration and not waste time where our efforts will not be fruitful.

I am personally drawn to esoteric ideas just because they are esoteric. Sometimes it is hard to determine if they are important and esoteric or just esoteric.

Just my opinion. I hope I have not been too direct.

First, Kabbalah is necessary for the Jews (I am a Jew) to understand the mission of Christ in the context of us being held to a convenant that would prohibit us to follow another religion. Kabbalah is able to translate the content of the gospels (particulary one I use called the Aquarian Gospel http://www.oracleofthephoenix.com/forum/8-religion/35-the-aquarian-gospel.html ) into the deepest levels of Torah. Jews need ot understand that Jesus was not the Messiah of Isaiah but was the template for the Adam Kadmon which is symbolic of Man's balance between Matter and Spirit. It is about an ascension from one focus to another.

Non-Jews need to understand that the Jewish concept of Messiah was tied to being saved - not from the devil or satan or whatever Christians conceive of, the saving was from exile and/or their enemies who attacked them for keeping their convenant.

Jesus represented the Adam Kadmon template to his people which was totally out of context with whether he was THE Messiah or not. Jesus never claimed to be the Messiah or a King or anything of the sort. He was trying to internalize the message of one being their own saviour within their own spiritual kingdom with their own ability to ascend a totally material existance.

The Christians were misled. Romans 11:11 provides Paul's mission statement which was to be an apostle to the Gentiles. They were not to cut-off the root but to welcome the Jews to their fold (a belief in the Christ Consciousness) Jesus displayed. The message became corrupted and Jesus became their God. When he spoke about God his Father he was not claiming sole sonship. He was speaking about God our Father as we are all children of God and by allowing us to become vessels of universal love - we could deepen that connection.

So yes, Kabbalah can teach everyone about salvation by first understanding that saving comes from within. It is by deepening our own Christ Consciousness that we can heal ourselves. Kabbalah presents us with a blueprint called the Tree of Life which is made up of 10 Sefirot which correspond with each of the 10 Commandments or Principles as I call them. If we start backwards we come to the Sefirah of Malchuth which means Kingdom. The last commandment is concerns coveting. Jesus says the Kingdom of God is within and without. In other words if we feel lack within or without, we cut ourselves off of the flow of abundance. We chase that which we think we do not possess - such as salvation. Stealing and Adultry deal with the next Sefirot which also deal with acting from a place of lack. Everything in the biblical narrative sources crimes and dramas to lack of one thing or another - Knowledge, Blessing, Being the Favored etc.

Kabbalah offers the roadmap to understand what was the original teachings that have been so distorted over time.

Thanks for allowing me the opportunity to express my opinion.

[volgadon]

First, Kabbalah is necessary for the Jews (I am a Jew) to understand the mission of Christ in the context of us being held to a convenant that would prohibit us to follow another religion.

Sounds terribly like Rennaisance Christian interpretations, but if it is just for understanding various messianic roles, Kabbalah isn't required, the exoteric aspects cover it fairly well. Of course, I could be misunderstanding you.

Edited March 25, 2012 by volgadon

[sbjazzman]

Sounds terribly like Rennaisance Christian interpretations, but if it is just for understanding various messianic roles, Kabbalah isn't required, the exoteric aspects cover it fairly well. Of course, I could be misunderstanding you.

Yes you are misunderstanding me. To understand Christ one must understand the Adam Kadmon which is an estoreric construct http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Kadmon

[mfbukowski]

So yes, Kabbalah can teach everyone about salvation by first understanding that saving comes from within.

Well I would certainly agree with that. I consider myself ultimately a "mystic" I suppose. Anything like what we call "spiritual knowledge" must come from the spirit directly.

But there is a central conflict then in the idea that spiritual knowledge "comes from within" and the idea that it could be taught.

So I am suspicious of anyone who says "spiritual knowledge comes from within, and I will show you what it is".

If it can be taught, it comes from the teacher, not from "within".

There are meditation techniques of course etc which can help teach one how to find meaning in one's life, but when we start bumping into dogmas, I think we get in trouble.

The reason I am LDS is perhaps oddly because I see it as founded on personal revelation- in other words that spiritual knowledge "comes from within" and I see it has a profound view of the nature of man- that man can become God and that God is indeed (a) man. I see that as central to what others have written about "Christ consciousness" and find the notion that Jesus is the Messiah helps me tie it all together in a profound way- seeing Jesus as the God/Man is of course totally consistent with that whole world-view.

I see Kabbalah as a mythic structure (not meaning it is "false" but in the sense it is metaphor, analogy, or model) of a way of thinking about symbolism which is helpful in elevating the mind to a point where revelation enters and ultimately it is that revelation which brings us closer to God. So in a sense it is an exercise- a jumping off point or methodology, like meditation, but in this case a rational technique which can get us closer to being accessible to revelation, or mystical access to the One- or however you want to put it.

The whole problem as I see it is that words only get us so far.

Incidentally, welcome! I suppose we are all heretics to someone, in our individual process of stitching this all together into a consistent view that works for us individually!

Edited March 25, 2012 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

Yes you are misunderstanding me. To understand Christ one must understand the Adam Kadmon which is an estoreric construct http://en.wikipedia....iki/Adam_Kadmon

Do you know that Mormons believe that God is a Man?

That our entire religious philosophy is based on that idea? And that I think we probably understand Adam Kadmon better than anybody?

Edited March 25, 2012 by mfbukowski

[sbjazzman]

Do you know that Mormons believe that God is a Man?

That our entire religious philosophy is based on that idea? And that I think we probably understand Adam Kadmon better than anybody?

Thank you for the very considerate and thoughtful reply mfbukiwski. I agree with everything you said and only differ on method. When I was initiated in a metaphysical group at the tender age of 20 (35 years ago), we began meditating on drawing the in the Christ Consciousness (btw the teacher was former LDS who changed when he went on a mission to India). I was not very comfortable with this but we were taught quite a bit of esoteric material which really didn't connect with me until I studied Kabbalah 25 years later. I begain to understand the esoteric nature of the Christ in relationship to the Adam Kadmon concept in Kabbalah. The simple teaching earlier was that Love was the child of Wisdom and Understanding. In Kabbalistic terms, Tiferet is the blossoming of Chokmah (Wisdom) and Binah (Understanding). These simple things took years to really truly absorb.

In terms of spiritual knowledge (Da'at) coming from within, I was talking about Salvation coming from within. Spiritual Knowledge - Da'at meaning such is the 11th non-sefirah which in my opinion actually becomes activated as if it were a sefirah is of course based on learning which can come from anywhere. I received plenty from a UFO sighting which oviously is contrary to where most would conventionally seek such learning.

The question was asked - How would an understanding of the esoteric help in Salvation? This is where I've had to learn the hard way, that it begins with gratitude for what we already have. It is the escape from the narrow place which in Hebrew is called Mitzraim and is also the name of Egypt. It is the bottom most point in the Tree of Life diagram which is indicative of being enslaved to our limitations whether self-imposed or not.

[sbjazzman]

Do you know that Mormons believe that God is a Man?

That our entire religious philosophy is based on that idea? And that I think we probably understand Adam Kadmon better than anybody?

Well I'm not exactly sure what Mormons believe. I came here to see if someone can explain why Isaiah 11:6 is depicted in the mountains ot Arizona in relationship to most historical UFO sighting ever recorded which I was a major witness to.

[Maidservant]

The OP started off talking about a song, and I was looking forward to more of that. Also my mind went to D & C 128:19-23 where it becomes a song. Small portion: "Let the mountiains shout for joy, and all ye valleys cry aloud; and all ye seas and dry lands tell the wonders of your Eternal King! And ye rivers, and brooks, and rills, flow down with gladness. Let the woods and all the trees of the field praise the Lord; and ye solid rocks weep for joy! And let the sun, moon, and the morning stars sing together, and let all the sons of God shout for joy! And let the eternal creations declare his name forever and ever! And again I say, how glorious is the voice we hear from heaven, proclaiming in our ears, glory, and salvation, and honor, and immortality, and eternal life; kingdoms, principalities, and powers!"

Obviously the idea that God created through his "word" also has affinities with social constructivism- especially when God as an exalted human who interacts linguistically through revelations to his children.

I always love your viewpoint. Also creating by speech is also related to program theory since it is the wave of the future even for us mortals to cause things to "work" by speaking at them (computers etc).

On the topic of learning to think "in the manner of the Jews" (when did we become so popular?),

Ha ha. Well, the Latter-day Saints don't think of Judaism as a "lateral" or "separate" religion from themselves; rather "heritage" religion. Each Latter-day Saint, by their Patriarchal blessing, is a member of one of the tribes of Israel. This is generally thought of as literal as well as spiritual.

Just for fun, I'll go ahead and complete the thought that all of creation is not created solely for man's place of habitation while he is on his way to becoming what ere he becomes but that man simply is the presiding portion of a collective creation in which each level and intelligent entity is connected in a symbiotic fashion. Each level of intelligent creation is fulfilling their role according to laws and everything below the presiding level is dependent on the presiding levels successful attainment of eternal life. In other words they (other intelligent creations) succeed in eternal procreative existence only in as much as man attains the capacity to function in a creative capacity. They are vested in our success, even as we are vested in theirs. We only succeed if all of creation does it's part, which it will always do, while suns and universes and moons and plants and amoebas will only continue in eternal creation within the realms where a successful presiding entity (a God) has initiated the organization of spirit children to occupy the presiding role to reign over the other creations in the eternal process. There are God orbs that create after their image as well as Gods in whose image we are. Our role can become that of presiding over all of these organizations according to the laws of light and truth that govern such. This is a principle of the unity of eternity which can be difficult for man to grasp because we tend to think of all things with man as the center and fail to realize how interdependent we are on each level of organized creation - no one succeeding without the successful fulfillment of each level and role.

Thank you for this. While I don't know if I'll settle on this information in exactly the same form as you have it, it nevertheless provided a shift in my understanding.

Not coincidentally (at least to me), the grouping of 4 may be seen in the design of Solomon's temple: Holy of Holies (celestial), Inner Court (terrestrial) , Outer Court (telestial) , and outside the temple wall (outer darkness).

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Our temples still have the Court of the Gentiles, but we just call it Temple Grounds.

[sbjazzman]

Well I'm not exactly sure what Mormons believe. I came here to see if someone can explain why Isaiah 11:6 is depicted in the mountains ot Arizona in relationship to most historical UFO sighting ever recorded which I was a major witness to.

OK let me try to ring it back on topic as the previous post seems to infer. The song references mountains. Isaiah references mountains. God's presence always has something to do with mountains. While it is easy to assume that mountains are metaphor for the higher realms, I have discovered this image which prompted me to write a book using Kabbalh to deconstruct it http://maps.google.com/?ll=33.398532,-113.527434&spn=1.742639,3.56781&hnear=Arizona&t=f&z=9&ecpose=33.39853241,-113.52743415,286818.67,-0.254,0,0

I have very little understanding of the Mormon religion but my sister is now LDS and as I said ealier I received my earliest esoteric instruction from a former LDS member and I do know that there is a belief concerning Zion and it being here in America. All of this started because I was one of the first witnesses of the Phoenix Lights in 1997 which were amber orbs which I believe Mormons attach meaning to (celestial orbs).

Some posters have talked about trying to find a way to bring in the Kabbalistic perspective with the Mormon perspective. I attempt to bring out the Kabbalistic perspective across many religions and mythologies in this book http://www.oracleofthephoenix.com/book.html

I would like to get a Mormon perspective on what I've written - even if it's filled with judgment that I seem to be attacking Mormon doctrine (which I know very little of - so please consider that prior to taking shots at me). I do have issues with fundamentalists of all colors. There are multiple layers of meaning contained within the texts we've relished and made sacred to us. I take a hyperliteral approach which attempts to bring both a rational and intuitive mindset into my narrative.

If there are Mormon corresponences with what I've found, I would be happy to share them on my forum http://www.oracleofthephoenix.com/forum.html

Thank you for any input or time anyone wishes to devote to this effort. I can see there are some very proficient intellects on this board.

[sbjazzman]

I should add the people heard on this video taken from my home on March 13, 1997 were a Mormon family that was visiting our house each night of the sightings.