The Fall
-
@DavidH said
"What is the thelemic and/or kabbalistic view of the "Fall" and did Crowley write specifically about it anywhere? Is the idea not inherent in the Kabbalah?"
Yes. The thing to understand is that it's a psychological issue, not a moral issue.
That is, The Fall represents the formulation of the Ruach at the dawn of the Aeon of Osiris. - There is a Qabalistic analysis of this somewhere in the upper reaches of The Vision & the Voice - maybe the 7th Aethyr?
"Does the Kabbalistic view infer some sort of fall from a higher state to our present one?"
Wrong view. That starts to get moralistic. It's technically true only to the extent that the evolutionary creation of non-superconscious aspects of consciousness is movement into a "lower" state of consciousness. But one might better call it a "dive" than a "fall."
-
Thanks Jim. I wasn't looking at it as a moralistic fall, but there is some descent in the Kabbalah which is sometimes referred to as the "fall," and since thelema uses the Kabbalah, I knew there was some explanation. Your response sheds some light on it, thanks.
aum418, thanks for your response. You wrote: "Thelema posits that viewing the world as needing to be fixed or as wrong is silly."
Doesn't this depend on how you define "fix"? Our work is to get rid of the things attached to us that cloud the truth. You talk about someone needing to "purify" their veils...Isn't this something that needs to be "fixed"? It is something added onto the original perfection, no? If there is nothing to "fix" then what work has to be done? Why don't we all just relax and get a beer instead of doing all this work we're doing on the forum and any Order? We must take the rough ashler and shape and form it to perfection.
LLLL,
David -
@DavidH said
"
aum418, thanks for your response. You wrote: "Thelema posits that viewing the world as needing to be fixed or as wrong is silly."Doesn't this depend on how you define "fix"?"
Extremely good question. Yes.
You see, our work may be, from our current standpoint of relative ignorance, to 'get rid of the things attached to us that cloud the truth.' It is a strange paradox that this appears to be necessary yet we are merely revealing ourselves to ourselves more clearly. In Liber LXV II:57-61, "The prophet cried against the mountain; come thou hither, that I may speak with thee! The mountain stirred not. Therefore went the prophet unto the mountain, and spake unto it. But the feet of the proÿhet were weary, and the mountain heard not his voice. But I have called unto Thee, and I have journeyed unto Thee, and it availed me not. I waited patiently, and Thou wast with me from the beginning. This now I know, O my beloved, and we are stretched at our ease among the vines."
"You talk about someone needing to "purify" their veils...Isn't this something that needs to be "fixed"?"
Now you have to further investigate what you mean by "need." In terms of 'initiation' I think that people at least need a metaphor of going somewhere... i.e. crossing a river to an island (Nibbana), climbing a ladder (Qabalah), rising of the Kundalini through the chakras (Yoga), etc. ... to describe this process (whatever name you call it) of coming to understand this Perfection.
"It is something added onto the original perfection, no?"
This only makes sense if you consider 'perfection' subject to time, which I personally think is silly. There is a 'noumenal' experience outside the bounds of time & space & differentiation... which I think can be identified with Samadhi & K&C of HGA. Crowley writes in Liber Samekh, after identifying HImself with the Angel, "He acclaims His Angel as having laid down the Law of Love as the Magical formula of the Universe, that He may resolve the phenomenal again into its noumenal phase by uniting any two opposites in ecstasic passion." I would investigate this phenomenon further for yourself. Crowley further says in "Voice of the Silence", "The harmony of the doctrines of Action and Non-Action is to be found in The Way of the Tao. One should do what is perfectly natural to one; but this can only be done when one’s consciousness is merged in the Universal or Phallic Consciousness." This further highlights the importance of experiencing this Universal consciousness (or Phallic consciousness as Crowley often refers to it elsewhere) in relation to the Will of Thelema (i.e. your Will).
"If there is nothing to "fix" then what work has to be done? Why don't we all just relax and get a beer instead of doing all this work we're doing on the forum and any Order?"
Good question. Liber LXV says on this subject... the swan being "Ecstatic (Samadhic) consciousness" and "the little crazy boy" being one's own mind & reason (according to Crowley's comment):
(lines 17-26):"Also the Holy One came upon me, and I beheld a white swan floating in the blue. Between its wings I sate, and the æons fled away. Then the swan flew and dived and soared, yet no whither we went. A little crazy boy that rode with me spake unto the swan, and said: Who art thou that dost float and fly and dive and soar in the inane? Behold, these many æons have passed; whence camest thou? Whither wilt thou go? And laughing I chid him, saying: No whence! No whither! The swan being silent, he answered: Then, if with no goal, why this eternal journey? And I laid my head against the Head of the Swan, and laughed, saying: Is there not joy ineffable in this aimless winging? Is there not weariness and impatience for who would attain to some goal? And the swan was ever silent. Ah! but we floated in the infinite Abyss. Joy! Joy! White swan, bear thou ever me up between thy wings! O silence! O rapture! O end of things visible and invisible! This is all mine, who am Not."
The essential message, I think, is bolded above...
"We must take the rough ashler and shape and form it to perfection."
We are merely transforming Perfection into Perfection (any 'difference' can only occur when the 0 has divided into 2 for union/love's sake... and what joy!
"The Universe is Change; every Change is the effect of an Act of
Love; all Acts of Love contain Pure Joy. Die daily.
Death is the apex of one curve of the snake Life: behold all
opposites as necessary complements, and rejoice." (Book of Thoth)P.S. As for just taking a beer... Thelema explicitly endorses being part of the world and rejoicing in its riches... in the various forms of love, in rich attire if you will, with jewels if you will, strange drugs, beds of purple, etc. This is all very much encouraged in the texts themselves... what was keeping you from doing this kind of stuff before? Even drinking beer is/can be part of your Will
65 & 210,
IAO131 -
93 I think the concept of "the fall" comes more from Kenneth Grant than Crowley and there's often confusion between the Left hand path and Black brothers, just as I have questions about the difference between the Luciferian fall from grace and the 'backside' of the tree kinda like Qoph being the backside of the head... my musings. I quote from www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/7069/grant6.html
"The so-called Mauve Zone is naught but Daäth, the false sephira of the Tree of Life, to which there is no "other side" as the Tree is only a symbolic representation of the multidimensional aspects of the microcosm and the macrocosm. Plunging into Daäth, so to speak, does not lead anywhere but to the qliphothic realms wherein the ego is torn, shredded, tortured, made one with the empty shells and used by them. He who plunges into Knowledge, forsaking Understanding and Wisdom, becomes an empty thing, sterile and perverse. He becomes a brother of the Left Hand Path, a Black Brother, as it is called in the Western Tradition, and employing the meanings of "Left Hand Path" as used in the Eastern Tradtion as Grant does to rationalize his fall from grace, in no way changes the facts of that fall."
My question is which way is up I suppose? or which way are you facing as to what's your left or right? Possibly men are going while women are coming or vice versa so neither is on point which is the flaw so fix it... if it is broken. I suspect Lucifer=Lilith=Shekinah (not numerically) but the entity. Hell I could even be she or just a thought passing through you..
-
@Asraiya said
"93 I think the concept of "the fall" comes more from Kenneth Grant than Crowley and there's often confusion between the Left hand path and Black brothers"
The concept of the "Fall" comes, without a doubt, from Judaism and spread by Christianity & Islam in peculiar ways.
"My question is which way is up I suppose? or which way are you facing as to what's your left or right?"
Are you aware of simple 'relativity'? I am not talking about advanced Einsteinian special/general relativity but the simple fact that all motion and position is relative to some other position.
Secondly, are you aware of the basic doctrine of dualities? That they are, in reality, two sides of One coin? Left has no meaning with right, up without down, and inside without outside. If you get to that state beyond dualities, I assure you that none of these make the littlest sense (or difference).
"Possibly men are going while women are coming or vice versa so neither is on point which is the flaw so fix it... if it is broken. I suspect Lucifer=Lilith=Shekinah (not numerically) but the entity. Hell I could even be she or just a thought passing through you..
"You are beginning to SOUND like Kenneth Grant... incoherent qabalistic identities and speaking of 'entities...' I personally am not fond of this.
IAO131
-
93
aum418
"That they are, in reality, two sides of One coin?"
I don't think of One as 2 dimensional, more spherical, but I believe in essence we are saying the same thing...
aum418
"You are beginning to SOUND like Kenneth Grant... incoherent qabalistic identities and speaking of 'entities...' I personally am not fond of this. "
I suppose me being at just a student level sounding like Kenneth Grant is a decent accomplishment
I'm sorry if I offended you. I suppose like I said I am then just a thought passing through- what I was getting at there is it's all just a matter of perspective. How are we to know if anyone truly exists and are not just a figment of our imagination? The same can be said for Left and Right Hand paths: How are we to be sure we are not looking in a mirror? -
I have always thought of the Fall as representing mans worship of form over spirit.
Rather than looking upon God, Adam instead takes a gander at that naked Eve...
Not to be taken as a moral 'fall' , but how people tend to follow what they can see rather than what they believe.
-
@Uni_Verse said
"I have always thought of the Fall as representing mans worship of form over spirit.
Rather than looking upon God, Adam instead takes a gander at that naked Eve...
Not to be taken as a moral 'fall' , but how people tend to follow what they can see rather than what they believe."
The Fall has NOTHING to do with Adam 'looking' at Eve. It amazes me that anyone could misread the story this poorly. The Fall occurs from Eve taking a bite from the apple that the serpent shows them and Eve gives the apple to Adam... did you really not know that?
IAO131
-
@aum418 said
"
The Fall has NOTHING to do with Adam 'looking' at Eve. It amazes me that anyone could misread the story this poorly. The Fall occurs from Eve taking a bite from the apple that the serpent shows them and Eve gives the apple to Adam... did you really not know that?
"The first line in the Torah after Adam and Eve eat the apple involves them sewing fig leaves to make covering.
To me, that implies that up until then they had never really looked at one another's bodies.
Since the tree is of 'good and evil' that means it is also of dualities. Before then, it seems to me, that they were 'one' with God and creation. Their eyes looked towards spirit (where all things are united) as opposed to form ( where they appear separate).
-
@Uni_Verse said
"The first line in the Torah after Adam and Eve eat the apple involves them sewing fig leaves to make covering.
To me, that implies that up until then they had never really looked at one another's bodies."
To me, that implies that up until then they had never been ashamed of their nakedness.
-
@Almighty Creator said
"
To me, that implies that up until then they had never been ashamed of their nakedness.
"I always thought of it more as being they never realized they were naked. Before the 'Fall' there was nothing to cover up, there was nothing to be ashamed of (there was no difference).
There still wasn't. But the idea that there was, wormed its way into their minds. Adam and Eve, looking towards each other saw only the differences : one was male, the other female. And so they attempted to conceal that difference by covering their 'nakedness'.
-
In esoteric Christianity, this reference to putting on clothes means MATTER. Before the fall ADAM KADMON was a spiritual being and ruler of the material universe (hence the power of naming of all things) but after the fall he was clothed in matter. That is the usual esoteric interpretation of the clothing, not in morals such as being ashamed, etc.
-
@Uni_Verse said
"
@aum418 said
"
The Fall has NOTHING to do with Adam 'looking' at Eve. It amazes me that anyone could misread the story this poorly. The Fall occurs from Eve taking a bite from the apple that the serpent shows them and Eve gives the apple to Adam... did you really not know that?
"The first line in the Torah after Adam and Eve eat the apple involves them sewing fig leaves to make covering.
To me, that implies that up until then they had never really looked at one another's bodies."
Perhaps you should read Genesis closer? Genesis 2:25 says quite clearly "25 And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed." Genesis 3:6-7 says clearly, "When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings." It says quite clearly that once they ate of the apple, the knowledge of Good & Evil, they felt naked and therefore ashamed. It has nothing to do with them never looking at each other before. In fact, it says clearly that she could see.
@Almighty Creator said
"
To me, that implies that up until then they had never been ashamed of their nakedness."
Quite right as Genesis 2:25 says quite clearly "25 And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed." before the eating of the fruit. I really wish people would take the 30 seconds it takes to read the first 4 or so chapters of Genesis before such speculation as Uni_verse's
@Uni_Verse said
"
@Almighty Creator said
"
To me, that implies that up until then they had never been ashamed of their nakedness.
"I always thought of it more as being they never realized they were naked. Before the 'Fall' there was nothing to cover up, there was nothing to be ashamed of (there was no difference).
There still wasn't. But the idea that there was, wormed its way into their minds. Adam and Eve, looking towards each other saw only the differences : one was male, the other female. And so they attempted to conceal that difference by covering their 'nakedness'."
Again, your "thought" could easily be rectified by reading the actual chapter in Genesis which is really quite short. They realized they were naked, they just weren't ashamed. It wasn't the realizing they were naked or seeing each other that made them ashamed, it was a direct consequence of eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge.
@DavidH said
"In esoteric Christianity, this reference to putting on clothes means MATTER. Before the fall ADAM KADMON was a spiritual being and ruler of the material universe (hence the power of naming of all things) but after the fall he was clothed in matter. That is the usual esoteric interpretation of the clothing, not in morals such as being ashamed, etc."
In one interpretation, the Yod of YHVH is Adam which is the perfect unity (Adam Kadmon before the fall/split). When Y goes through the process of HVH (EVE), it manifests as the World. When they reunite, the 'universe' is 'destroyed' or 'rectified.'
IAO131
-
I am talking about perceptions. How it would appear from their view point.
Yes, it says in 2:25 they were both naked. But does it say that they KNEW they were naked ? No, as it clearly states in 3:7 it is not until partaking of the apple that they come to the realization that they are naked.
(bold added by me in the quotes)@Genesis 3:7 said
"
Then the eyes of both of them were opened and they realized that they were naked... "
"Then, a few lines after...
@Genesis 3:9 said
"
HASHEM God called out to the man and said to him, "Where are you?"
"@Genesis 3:10 said
"
He (Adam) said "I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I am naked, so I hid."
"To which God replies:
@Genesis 3:11 said
"
And He (God) said, "Who told you that you are naked? Have you eaten of the tree form which I commanded you not to eat?"
"So while they were naked, the difference in their behavior before and after eating the apple clearly shows they were not aware of their nudity.
-
@Uni_Verse said
"I am talking about perceptions. How it would appear from their view point.
Yes, it says in 2:25 they were both naked. But does it say that they KNEW they were naked ? No, as it clearly states in 3:7 it is not until partaking of the apple that they come to the realization that they are naked.
(bold added by me in the quotes)@Genesis 3:7 said
"
Then the eyes of both of them were opened and they realized that they were naked... "
"Then, a few lines after...
@Genesis 3:9 said
"
HASHEM God called out to the man and said to him, "Where are you?"
"@Genesis 3:10 said
"
He (Adam) said "I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I am naked, so I hid."
"To which God replies:
@Genesis 3:11 said
"
And He (God) said, "Who told you that you are naked? Have you eaten of the tree form which I commanded you not to eat?"
"So while they were naked, the difference in their behavior before and after eating the apple clearly shows they were not aware of their nudity."
Seeing as how naked only has meaning when juxtaposed against the opposite/completement of 'clothed,' it seems obvious that they could literally be naked before eating of the fruit but the concept would have no meaning before teh split into dualities. "Naked" has no meaning when it is not differentiated from "Clothed," and so after eating of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge also allows them... Knowledge. To 'know' that they are X or Y or Z. They were not ashamed because even 'ashamed' is meaningless without 'proud' being juxtaposed next to it...
IAO131
-
@aum418 said
"
Seeing as how naked only has meaning when juxtaposed against the opposite/completement of 'clothed,' it seems obvious that they could literally be naked before eating of the fruit but the concept would have no meaning before teh split into dualities. "Naked" has no meaning when it is not differentiated from "Clothed," and so after eating of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge also allows them... Knowledge. To 'know' that they are X or Y or Z. They were not ashamed because even 'ashamed' is meaningless without 'proud' being juxtaposed next to it...
"Yes, as I see it before they ate the fruit, the fact that they were naked was meaningless. It was not the naked that stands as a complement/opposite to clothed but rather they were naked because there was nothing to hide and therefore nothing to be ashamed of.
Which is where I derive the idea of the Fall as being Adam , for the first time, looking upon Eve and seeing her as a woman. As, the complement/opposite of knowledge could be said to be ignorance. Having eaten the apple, Adam no longer recognized Eve as a part of him (she having been born from a piece of him ). Instead, he now sees her as something apart, and different from him.
Edit: Could not get the quote to work :X
-
Greetings, this is my first post on this forum (hello AUM418).
If I can return to the question of the Fall, perhaps someone more experienced would be willing to shed light on the theory of emanations (“degenerative monism”) in Kabbalah, namely how does Malkuth result from Kether?
Rabbi Luria’s theory of emanations states that each sephirah on the Tree of Life consists of emanations from the higher sephiroths: Chokmah receives the emanation from Kether, Binah receives the emanations of Chokmah and Kether, Chesed receives the emanations from Binah, Chokmah and Kether, Geburah receives the emanations from Chesed, Binah, Chokmah and Kether, etc and so forth down the Tree until we arrive at Malkuth.
If my understanding is correct, a “blockage” or “degeneration” of emanations occurs at each sephirah that passes down to the lower sephiroths.
My question:
What is the nature of this blockage/degeneration/veiling of emanations occurring at each sephira?