Spiritual Forums

Spiritual Forums (http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/index.php)
-   Judaism (http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=51)
-   -   the integration of I AM and G-d (http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=7364)

Honza 03-12-2010 11:09 PM

the integration of I AM and G-d
 
To many of us at SF and probably world wide too, there is a distinct difference between I AM (Hinduism/Buddhism) and G-d (Judaism/Islam).

The two spiritual paths seem incompatible.

I had a thought that perhaps the union of the two is what Jesus was talking about.

Jesus called Himself "The Son Of G-d" - Not "G-d" nor "I AM" - BUT BOTH!

He was apparently the connection of the two dichotomous truths.

To put it into simple language; He knew He was not ALL - The Father. Yet He also knew that He was G-d - I AM.

So how do you solve this riddle of being both G-d and not G-d?

You become "The Son Of G-d". Both G-d and I AM.

Jesus knew that it is impossible to be ALL of G-d...one has to let ALL of G-d BE. Not BE ALL of G-d.

Yet He also knew that He was an equal PART of that totality. He knew He was G-d as an equal. He knew He was I AM.

So what jesus was talking about is the integration of G-d and I AM, whereby ones "I" is an EQUAL part of the totality of G-d.

RabbiO 06-12-2010 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honza
To many of us at SF and probably world wide too, there is a distinct difference between I AM (Hinduism/Buddhism) and G-d (Judaism/Islam).

The two spiritual paths seem incompatible.

I had a thought that perhaps the union of the two is what Jesus was talking about.

Jesus called Himself "The Son Of G-d" - Not "G-d" nor "I AM" - BUT BOTH!

He was apparently the connection of the two dichotomous truths.

To put it into simple language; He knew He was not ALL - The Father. Yet He also knew that He was G-d - I AM.

So how do you solve this riddle of being both G-d and not G-d?

You become "The Son Of G-d". Both G-d and I AM.

Jesus knew that it is impossible to be ALL of G-d...one has to let ALL of G-d BE. Not BE ALL of G-d.

Yet He also knew that He was an equal PART of that totality. He knew He was G-d as an equal. He knew He was I AM.

So what jesus was talking about is the integration of G-d and I AM, whereby ones "I" is an EQUAL part of the totality of G-d.


H-

I'm not sure that placing this thread on the Judaism sub-forum is the best location for it if you insist on making Jesus a part of the conversation.

Further, though there are distinct differences between Hinduism and Judaism, an examination of the mystic tradition of Judaism might give you reason to change your mind, on some levels, regarding compatibility.

B'shalom,

Peter

pre-dawn 07-12-2010 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honza
To many of us at SF and probably world wide too, there is a distinct difference between I AM (Hinduism/Buddhism) and G-d (Judaism/Islam).

The two spiritual paths seem incompatible.

They are. They can only become compatible when both side leave the path.

Quote:

So what jesus was talking about is the integration of G-d and I AM, whereby ones "I" is an EQUAL part of the totality of G-d.
This doesn't make sense. Equal part, compared to what other part? And if you refer to the totality then it has no parts.
G-d needs to be transcended, not integrated, to get to I AM. I AM is way beyond G-d.
I AM also also nothing to do with "I". They are more like matter and ant-matter. The can exist while being apart, but coming together they annihilate each other. Meeting I AM results in I-destruction.

Honza 07-12-2010 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pre-dawn
This doesn't make sense. Equal part, compared to what other part? And if you refer to the totality then it has no parts.
G-d needs to be transcended, not integrated, to get to I AM. I AM is way beyond G-d.


That is really pure speculation. How do you know that G-d has no parts? How do you know that I AM is way beyond G-d?

Quote:

Originally Posted by pre-dawn
I AM also also nothing to do with "I". They are more like matter and ant-matter. The can exist while being apart, but coming together they annihilate each other. Meeting I AM results in I-destruction.


I did not know that. I thought that I AM has got everything to do with the "I".

pre-dawn 07-12-2010 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honza
I did not know that. I thought that I AM has got everything to do with the "I".

What on earth gave you that idea? Because there is an I in it?
I stands for 1 = One. There is no I in ONE.

Uma 07-12-2010 12:08 PM

Well what is YAWEH? What was said to Moses on the mountain when he asked "Who are you?" and the answer was "I am that I AM,"?

pre-dawn 07-12-2010 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uma
Well what is YAWEH? What was said to Moses on the mountain when he asked "Who are you?" and the answer was "I am that I AM,"?

The answer is a tautology and effectively means "don't ask silly questions".

A Glass named Esther 07-12-2010 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uma
Well what is YAWEH? What was said to Moses on the mountain when he asked "Who are you?" and the answer was "I am that I AM,"?


I respectfully ask you to use the term "HaShem" (The Name) from now on.

This is what HaShem said to Moses:

14. God said to Moses, "Ehyeh asher ehyeh (I will be what I will be)," and He said, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'Ehyeh (I will be) has sent me to you.'" יד. וַיֹּאמֶר אֱ־לֹהִים אֶל מֹשֶׁה אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה וַיֹּאמֶר כֹּה תֹאמַר לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶהְיֶה שְׁלָחַנִי אֲלֵיכֶם:

A Glass named Esther 07-12-2010 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pre-dawn
The answer is a tautology and effectively means "don't ask silly questions".


Moses was a Great Tzadik and one of the most perfect men to ever walk on this Earth. How could the most humble of all men ask a silly question.

The Torah does not waste words. Every detail is significant.

Some commentaries of what it refers to:

Rashi:

“Ehyeh asher ehyeh (I will be what I will be)”: “I will be” with them in this predicament “what I will be” with them in their subjugation by other kingdoms.

From the teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe:


14 God said to Moses, "Tell them that I was and shall continue to be with them in this exile, just as I shall be with them in their later exiles. I do not ignore them during their exiles, but in fact, I feel their suffering and suffer with them." Moses said, "It is enough that they have to suffer their present exile; why should I mention their future exiles?" God then said, "This is exactly what I meant. Although I am telling you that I will suffer with them in their future exiles, you shall say to the Israelites only that 'The God who says "I shall be with them in this exile" sent me to you.' "

A Glass named Esther 07-12-2010 02:22 PM

I am there with you, suffering with you
 
G-d said to Moses: You want to know My name? I am called by My deeds. I might be called E-l Sha-dai, or Tzevakot, or Elokim, or HaVaYaH. When I judge My creatures, I am called Elokim. When I wage war on the wicked, I am called Tzevakot. When I tolerate the sins of man, I am called E-l Sha-dai. When I have compassion on My world, I am called Ha-Va-Ya-H..."
(Midrash Rabbah)

The "I Am" in Torah has a different focus than commonly used here. It directly refers to the state of exile and the children of Israel being subjugated in Egypt.

Honza, I found an article for you that should help clear it up:

Article on I am/ I shall be


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:01 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums