12 April - (Earth) Liber LXV, I:2-3
-
2. Adonai spake unto V.V.V.V.V., saying: There must ever be division in the word.
3. For the colours are many, but the light is one. -
Adonai is saying, as far as I can see, "White light is formed from many colours. It can be split by a prism into those colours, and reformed into white light by another prism. In a similar way is the word divided - but it can re reconstituted."
Also, on a more mundane level, in Freemasonry many important words are never given at length, but rather halved or lettered. In this way the two Masons testing each other can be sure that the other is in possession of the secrets of the degree. In the HRA degree this is done quite cleverly; the word is divided and reassembled in a way that allows none of the three to *necessarily *know the entire word.
That is my tenpennyworth.
-
Thanks, Zafero. I like!
2. Adonai spake unto V.V.V.V.V., saying: There must ever be division in the word.
3. For the colours are many, but the light is one.I am struck today most by the words "must ever." Must. It is essential and necessary.
And this is specifically the voice of Chiah to Neshamah. (Those are the aspects that "Adonai" and "V.V.V.V.V" represent, respectively, throughout Liber LXV.) The necessity of the diverse and varied representations of single Truth is required by our biological (including neurological) diversity.
That is, the very same faculty of consciousness that represents the seemingly unending branching and diversification of life-forms is the Voice telling us that understandable representations of the Truth require ("must") comparable diversity. -
I am reminded by this to think and be mindful of breathe.
For as I breath and speak my words I do pause and breathe.
How I choose (or was conditioned?) to pause and project my breath with sound is My way.
Even though I understand that all is light, in different frequencies, my voice my breath, my word is my gift, how I share my uniqueness with the world.
-
JAE 93,
"And this is specifically the voice of Chiah to Neshamah. (Those are the aspects that "Adonai" and "V.V.V.V.V" represent, respectively, throughout Liber LXV.) "
This caught my attention. I understand Adonai to be associated with the HGA manifesting via Tiphereth and/or (more subtly) emanating from Kether via Gimel. Conventionally, Adonai IS the Angel, which isn't (..?) usually associated specifically with Chiah and thus with Chokmah. What am I missing here? Is Liber LXV a love-song to Chiah, not to the root of the HGA in Kether?
93 93/93,
Edward
-
As you go through Liber LXV, some of these things shake out - the different "characters" emerge. Part of this is in the relationship of V.V.V.V.V. to Adonai.
V.V.V.V.V. is Crowley's 8=3 motto. Therefore, it refers specifically to the Binah aspect of consciousness, or Neshamah. (This will be even more obvious when we introduce other characters such as the Scribe, who is the Ruach function.) "Adonai" appears here at the beginning specfically in relationship to V.V.V.V.V. - as the Angel of V.V.V.V.V. And, from Binah, that "mate" is found in Chokmah, Yod to her Heh.
-
JAE, 93,
What fascinates me here is the idea that the relationship, for V.V.V.V.V. is not that of beholding and adoring the essence of the HGA in or coming from Kether, which has always been how I viewed this Liber. The adoration is directed towards Adonai as the manifesting True Will. Is it that the Yechidah in Kether is silent (or, that it manifests as Silence), whereas the Chiah in Chokmah is the utterance, the Word? I'm not sure I can articulate what I'm seeing or feeling here, but it casts a very different light on nature and function of the text.
93 93/93,
Edward -
I think I get it, Edward and, yes, it's hard to articulate.
I think one thing operating here is that LXV speaks differently from wherever on the Tree one finds oneself. We're used to thinking of it from below Tiphereth - especially since it is first given to the Probationer - but that doesn't mean it's the only perspective.
For myself, that "Adonai = Chokmah" I tend to treat more as "Yod in general," which sideways incorporates the Chokmah-Kether blur you mentioned.
-
93,
Yes, the perspective is obviously key. AC says in his Commentary (the very first paragraph), "Each [chapter] shows its Element in the light of the relation between the Adeptus Minor and his Holy Guardian Angel." So its easy to make assumptions (right or wrong) about the consciousness or mentality of an AM, and assume it's all coming from a Tipheric perspective.
Yet I've always been aware the point of reference goes well beyond Tiphereth, without being able to pull it together for myself. And I think the text glides in and out of different levels at different points. Which, I assume, is how K&C, and even the lower reflections or glimmerings of that state, would be experienced. The clue is in, "For the colours are many." The next verse explicitly says the Scribe here writes in different 'colours.'
93 93/93,
Edward -
". . . Your enemies are just here to correct things about you that you can't see. So, when you think about it, your enemies are just your friends in reverse." - Gary Busey
"There must ever be division in the word."
I find myself returning to this topic again and again, feeling I have a million things I'd like to share. Every time, I find myself at a loss for words.
Fitting, I guess.
It comes at the beginning. But it's the end of speech itself.
-
The possibilities are endless, the word seeks to express itself through all possibilities. Its nature is continuous.
-
Yes I may have a thought, or more of a question.
Must be a division appears to imply that there must be different beliefs and different churches… Am I correct on this so far?
If I am correct, then why is it so? I mean why must there be a division of everything? This seems to create conflict.
The child in me wants to know… Don’t worry if there is no answer… then I will accept that it is, until I understand it better.
-
@fnewburn4236 said
"Must be a division appears to imply that there must be different beliefs and different churches… Am I correct on this so far?"
Yes - but not just limited to different churches. Even if aligned with the same "system," this would be true with every teacher (and, for that matter, with every student).
"If I am correct, then why is it so? I mean why must there be a division of everything? This seems to create conflict."
That's a characteristic of intellect. It divides. This includes language. Language is enormously valuable; however, capital-T Truth can't be wholly expressed by language. It's bigger than language. So any attempt to express it in language is a lie (that is, a distortion or incompletion).
-
According to my understanding, truth (light) has been broken up amongst all the beliefs so that there are parts of it in all beliefs. The parts of truth mixed in with untruths create noise, noise that our physical self understands.
I appreciate this new understanding of why
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
"If I am correct, then why is it so? I mean why must there be a division of everything? This seems to create conflict."That's a characteristic of intellect. It divides. This includes language. Language is enormously valuable; however, capital-T Truth can't be wholly expressed by language. It's bigger than language. So any attempt to express it in language is a lie (that is, a distortion or incompletion)."
But the many colors into which light is divided do not conflict -- they're just partial. So I take it that apparently conflicting views of the Truth -- immanence vs transcendence, free will vs determinism, even atheism vs theism, etc. -- are not really in conflict, they're just partial.