Comments on: The Parallels of Faith http://www.peelapom.com/visions-of-the-divine/the-parallels-of-faith/ Earth-based Magickal Judaism, often known as Jewitchery - writings, rituals, midrash, magick, prayers, and more... Sun, 06 Jul 2008 05:19:21 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Angela http://www.peelapom.com/visions-of-the-divine/the-parallels-of-faith/#comment-37 Angela Thu, 23 Feb 2006 17:33:24 +0000 http://www.peelapom.com/jewitchery/the-parallels-of-faith/#comment-37 "I understand that for many the statue is just a tool to help them focus, but for so many the statue just is. It is a manifestation of the Divine for them — which for me in incomprehensible." I am thinking about the many idolotry conversations we have had in the past. Perhaps I don't know many hard-core idoloters, but the folks I know who do give homage to statues don't see that physical statue as equaling the totality of their deity. Instead, I see idolotry as another aspect of what we say in Becoming "The Divine abounds everywhere and dwells in everything." If that is the case, then there is an aspect of the Divine in the statue, and the statue is a manifestation of the Divine. Same as for the entire world around us. To me, it is just a difference in scale. Different people need or want different ways to connect with the divine. Also, I don't have the same trip-factor over a religion being polytheistic. I like the idea of "aspected monotheism," but see a potential trap in it as well. Most monotheists (and I am generalizing here) tend to see their personal aspect or version of the Divine as the Ultimate, rather than seeing their personal aspect as just that -- an aspect or part of the Ultimate. I do not believe that humans have the capacity to really interact with the Ultimate directly. Even we try to conceive of the Ultimate (much less try to honor or worship it), we only conceive of a part of it. The difference of scale between finite and infinite is too great, or at least it is for most. Polytheism allows for human perspective, and most still have the concept of a greater Ultimate beyond the individual deities that are daily worshipped. “I understand that for many the statue is just a tool to help them focus, but for so many the statue just is. It is a manifestation of the Divine for them — which for me in incomprehensible.”

I am thinking about the many idolotry conversations we have had in the past. Perhaps I don’t know many hard-core idoloters, but the folks I know who do give homage to statues don’t see that physical statue as equaling the totality of their deity. Instead, I see idolotry as another aspect of what we say in Becoming “The Divine abounds everywhere and dwells in everything.” If that is the case, then there is an aspect of the Divine in the statue, and the statue is a manifestation of the Divine. Same as for the entire world around us. To me, it is just a difference in scale. Different people need or want different ways to connect with the divine.

Also, I don’t have the same trip-factor over a religion being polytheistic. I like the idea of “aspected monotheism,” but see a potential trap in it as well. Most monotheists (and I am generalizing here) tend to see their personal aspect or version of the Divine as the Ultimate, rather than seeing their personal aspect as just that — an aspect or part of the Ultimate. I do not believe that humans have the capacity to really interact with the Ultimate directly. Even we try to conceive of the Ultimate (much less try to honor or worship it), we only conceive of a part of it. The difference of scale between finite and infinite is too great, or at least it is for most. Polytheism allows for human perspective, and most still have the concept of a greater Ultimate beyond the individual deities that are daily worshipped.

]]> By: Asherah Batya http://www.peelapom.com/visions-of-the-divine/the-parallels-of-faith/#comment-36 Asherah Batya Thu, 16 Feb 2006 18:15:01 +0000 http://www.peelapom.com/jewitchery/the-parallels-of-faith/#comment-36 I've read that the kabbalistic 'Ein Sof' concept is very similar to the Hindu stream of Advaita Vedanta, or nondualism. Here, the individual Atman is essentially Brahman, that is to say, the ultimate reality. Or basically, what you said. ;) I’ve read that the kabbalistic ‘Ein Sof’ concept is very similar to the Hindu stream of Advaita Vedanta, or nondualism. Here, the individual Atman is essentially Brahman, that is to say, the ultimate reality. Or basically, what you said. ;)

]]>