help I have fallen down a Zoroastrian rabbit hole
and it's a bit scary when I go 'hmm, the Amesha Spenta... look a bit like the sefirot? squinting a bit to get the core seven out of the ten' and yeep Theosophy went there
And not just Theosophy. Hmm.
Whatever was in Kabbalah was floating around the early Christian milieu, and if it had Persian links, then presumably the Jewish milieu before that?
Just casually chatting with angels, as monks do
or doing Block Transfer Computation to shunt the universe's entropy into a Charged Vacuum Emboitment
by which I mean, this whole configuration of six with a seventh in the middle, it's pretty core, I think. How we got from there to ten I'm curious to find out.
Wisdom and understanding (chokhmah and binah), counsel and might (chesed and gevurah), knowledge and piety (netzach and hod) ...? And the 'fear of the Lord' would then be Tifiret?
Ah, or 'piety' is an interpolation, and 'the Spirit of the Lord' is Tiferet while 'fear of the Lord' is Hod. That works better.
uh oh I am not the only one falling down this particular rabbithole
<< I am obsessed by the idea that we project reality through a mass delusion, shared consciousness, a form of hypnotic dreaming that generates everything in our multiverse. >>
Yep. It is a very common idea and it has gone back thousands of years and underpins most of the world's great religions.
And for some reason I seem to be being nudged toward this idea of... the Holy Spirit being plural.
I don't know why this is important but it seems to be, somehow.
I *think* what the Christians think of as 'the Holy Spirit' is actually something like a continuum of quantized emanations? with resonances being individual beings? something like that. Many, but one.
"Earth" or Malkut is unique because we are somewhat disconnected from this higher cosmic spectrum. That's bad but/and also... good? Because we have free will.
Whoever/whatever the Seven are is... somewhat important somehow.
Ugh and of course sufficiently esoteric occult philosophy intersects with hypertext via Umberto Freaking Eco, database theory, cryptography, Liebniz and John Wilkins because why not
This is why the 1990s were weird, kids.
<< “What if we regarded the defect in Wilkins‘ system as its prophetic virtue? What if we treated Wilkins as if he were obscurely groping towards a notion for which we have only recently invented a name–hypertext? >>
I don't even know what Jakob Boehme's cosmogony is about but I approve of it
Server run by the main developers of the project It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!