From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nagasiva) Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,alt.occult.kabbalah,talk.religion.misc,talk.religion.newage,alt.consciousness.mysticism Subject: JMarshall: QBL Terminology/Culture Date: 13 Sep 1997 12:58:30 -0700 Organization: Bay Junction Technology, Inc. Lines: 62 Sender: tyagi@news.bjt.net Message-ID: <5ver96$csv@bay1.bjt.net> Reply-To: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com "Jeff Marshall" X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 (NOV) NNTP-Posting-Host: bay1.bjt.net Path: bridge!not-for-mail Xref: bridge alt.magick.tyagi:14915 alt.magick:118396 talk.religion.misc:323865 talk.religion.newage:80035 alt.consciousness.mysticism:13115 [from kabbalah-l@hollyfeld.org: "Jeff Marshall" ] Greetings I certainly have neither the formal training nor the erudition in Qabalah of many on this list. But what I have found through interaction in several online groups is students of this topic tend to fall into roughly two categories: 1. Those that tie the study pretty much to a religious system of some sort 2. Those that don't Now this doesn't mean there aren't crossovers and that people are "pigeon-holed", although I've met many that are. In category 1, I've run into again broadly speaking, two subcategories a. Those who say the study is strictly Judaic and those not approaching it from very well defined Judaic model are not "properly" studying the subject. b. Those who seem to use the study to prove that Jesus Christ was part of a grand design form the very beginning and apply the study within a specifically Christian framework to "prove" Christianity. I really don't think I'm the first to notice these rough groups. The breakout of Kabbalah/Cabala/Qabalah is not mine. I've run across it in several places. If you don't like it, then hey, I'm not trying to label you or anyone. Don't sweat it. But what I have seen in many places is that those tending toward 1a(Jewish approach) tend to spell it Kabbalah almost all the time. They also *tend* to take the most umbrage when someone approaches the study from a non-Judaic perspective. For example, initiation. Generally speaking most of the Jewish students (and here I don't mean ethnically Jewish, but rather strict Jewish interpretation) I've discussed the topic with, the flow is only one way: Kether to Malkuth. The idea of initiation and backward flow is alien at best(this of course neglects Merkabah). In an initiatic setting, the student works to reintegrate the forces/properties of the Sephiroth back together and travel back up the Tree to awaken the Divine within. Personally, I see this as the meaning behind Enoch and his walk with God, especially in the traditions where Enoch is transformed into Mettatron. I honestly don't see the Qabalah as Judaic. Rather, I see it as lovingly maintained by the Judaic tradition and passed to the West in a Judaic form. I think we can see traces of Gnostic thought, Mesopotamian thought and the Egyptian Ennead in the Qabalah. That is why I shy away from taking a religious approach to the study. But I certainly do not say my approach is the only way at all. Which is why when on a list with many different approaches to the study, I attempt to clarify my position and use a spelling that many (obviously not all) associate with the Western Esoteric interpretation of the study. If I have offended in some way, then please accept my apology. If I have shown you that I am unlearned in the study, then by all means either instruct or ignore an unlearned man. AOI Jeff [quotations omitted] -- (emailed replies may be posted);join the AMT syncretism!!;call: 408/2-666-SLUG! see http://www.abyss.com/tokus; "Clement of Rome taught that God rules the world with a right and a left hand, the right being Christ, the left Satan." - CGJung