Several Sephiroth

Zephyros

And what of those who are not bound by contract? The non-Israelites that frequently appear throughout the bible that are either used as tools of Yahweh's vengeance or are slaughtered like cattle for the delight of Yahweh.

Well, I'm not defending God, obviously. :)

I'm just saying that if one uses the Bible to work out a Lurianic idea, one should try to think like Luriah and look at it from the point of view of a religious Middle Ages Jew, living in Palestine during tumultuous times. You don't have to necessarily stay in that mindset, but the background of an idea does give clues about which angle to tackle it from. Even those atrocities would be worked out as having a higher purpose somehow, maybe even abstractly as we're doing now, with Kabbalah. A "safe" assumption to make, for example, is that God is never wrong. It doesn't matter whether one believes in it or not, but all subsequent ideas stem from the single one, which wouldn't be denied by observant Jews, especially at the time.
 

Aeon418

I'm just saying that if one uses the Bible to work out a Lurianic idea, one should try to think like Luriah and look at it from the point of view of a religious Middle Ages Jew, living in Palestine during tumultuous times.

This is why I think the Lurianic concept of Tzimtzum is related to the idea of Geburah as 'restraint'. This is echoed numerous times in the bible by the sudden departure of the glory of the Lord just before things turn bad. The classic example being his departure from the temple right before the invasion of Jerusalem by the Babylonians. It's as if God's DIN needs to be carried out in his absence.

How can an all powerful god allow his temple to be destroyed? Because he left.

How can an 'all good', all knowing and wise creator create a seemingly flawed creation? Because he made a void in his own being (Tzimtzum) and thereby separated himself from his creation.

Of course, as interesting as this idea is, I don't subscribe to the Lurianic contraction/withdrawl model of emanations. The expansion model sits better with me. An added bonus is not having to explain away the existence of evil. It's all part of the package deal called duality.
 

ravenest

Well, I'm not defending God, obviously. :)

I'm just saying that if one uses the Bible to work out a Lurianic idea, one should try to think like Luriah and look at it from the point of view of a religious Middle Ages Jew, living in Palestine during tumultuous times. You don't have to necessarily stay in that mindset, but the background of an idea does give clues about which angle to tackle it from. Even those atrocities would be worked out as having a higher purpose somehow, maybe even abstractly as we're doing now, with Kabbalah. A "safe" assumption to make, for example, is that God is never wrong. It doesn't matter whether one believes in it or not, but all subsequent ideas stem from the single one, which wouldn't be denied by observant Jews, especially at the time.

Thats why these guys are ' heretics' ; "What ! G'd made a mistake when he set up creation ? ? ! ? ! "

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/2351627520/h01CDE476/
 

Zephyros

Thats why these guys are ' heretics' ; "What ! G'd made a mistake when he set up creation ? ? ! ? ! "

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/2351627520/h01CDE476/

LOL. Which also explains why Kabbalah is traditionally taught only after a certain age and after having had a family. You don't want to go around telling youngsters God makes mistakes, because they wouldn't understand the Kabbalistic Humpty Dumpty logic of words and ideas meaning whatever you want them to. The old Kabbalist understands what is meant by "mistake" but the uninitiated would perhaps misconstrue this and miss the deeper meaning.
 

Aeon418

Thats why these guys are ' heretics' ; "What ! G'd made a mistake when he set up creation ? ? ! ? ! "

Isn't that what Luria tried to avoid with his speculative model? To him creation is the way it is simply because God 'vacated himself' and created a void that was no longer filled with his 'holy presence'. The subsequent creation in the void, although imbued with his power, is strictly speaking not part of the 'divine body' That way you can have a flawless all powerful creator of all-goodness, and simultaneously have a 'seemingly' flawed creation.

That's what I call having your cake and eating it. :laugh: