The Qu'Ran and Ibn Al Arabi

[quote author=Altair]
There is something I don't get. If God is Absolute and perfect in all aspects, how can divine names benefit from the fact that somebody offers a possibility to manifest their properties?
[/quote]

This is a big question. Volumes can be and has been written about this question.

One way of exploring it is to negate the assumption that there is a being God who is absolute and perfect in all respects. Considering this would be heresy in olden days - something serious enough for people to killed. On the positive side, considering God as absolute and perfect was a way of keeping human self-importance in check.

Starting with the assumption that God is not perfect, one can speculate that God needs creation as a means of manifesting his names. Gurdjieff developed this idea in his Beelzebub's Tales. In his allegory he mentioned that the dwelling place of God, the most holy Sun Absolute, was found to be diminishing in volume with the passage of the merciless Heropass (time). This necessitated a change in "laws" - from Autoegocrat (interpreted as I-hold-everything-in-my-control) to Trogoautoegocrat (interpreted as I-hold-together-by-reciprocal-feeding). This implies a feedback loop of mutual sustenance set up between God and creation.

As regards the mechanism of this reciprocal feeding, Gurdjieff introduced more special terms in Beelzebub's Tales. Here is an interpretation from JG Bennett, a student of G.

[quote author=JG Bennett in Talks on Beelzebub's Tales ]

When we undertake something that is to bring order, it requires effort and energy. This has to come from somewhere and something is transmitted to the task. To bring order deliberately, through an act of will, liberates conscious energy. When we undertake this, we give ourselves to the task and put ourselves under its demands. Part of the energy involved goes into the task . We can see that something has been achieved. What we do not see is that something has gone to serve a higher purpose.
......
Whenever we do conscious work, the energy divides into three. One part is the energy that goes into bringing about the visible result and this includes the material energies involved. The second part is liberated for some cosmic purpose. This is not like ordinary energy, it is energy that can be used by higher powers. The third part— connected with helkdonis— is that in which we come closer to our own source or to God. Something is added to our own being.

[/quote]

Bringing order through conscious effort can be called syntropy - the opposite of entropy. The noumenal realm, which is beyond space-time is where archetypes or the names of God exist. The names of God seek to express themselves in phenomenal world of space-time. Certain expressions happen regularly and do not need conscious agency. However, certain expressions need appropriate conscious agents for realization in the phenomenal world of space-time. If such conscious agents are available, then a transaction takes place between a particular name of God in the noumenal realm and the agent and the result of the transaction is an event in the space-time phenomenal world. And somehow this transaction leads to reciprocal feeding between the realms.

The material aspect of such transactions is the observable part - it is what is visible as a task completed, change in state etc.

What G called helkdonis - the part that adds to one's own being as a result of the transactional process - could correspond to what Ibn Al Arabi called "stations", the earnings of conscious labor. This is not strictly measurable but can be qualitatively felt and possibly shared as subjective experience.

We do not know what part goes back to the higher source but if G is correct, then that is the part which makes the divine names benefit from being manifested. Our sciences are still some way from fully understanding the non-material implications of such transactions.

<My speculations (warning: measures high on the out-on-a-limb meter)>

Borrowing some terms from the transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics (TIQM), a transaction involves a virtual "offer wave" from an emitter and a virtual "confirmation wave" from a potential absorber. If the process proceeds, then the transaction is realized in space-time as a measurable exchange of energies. An analogy would be an e-bay transaction with a seller (emitter) sending out an offer wave. If there are responses and subsequent resolution from the bidding process, a confirmation wave is generated from a buyer (absorber). These transactions are taking place in the virtual realm since no real material exchange has taken place yet. If the deal is closed, only then a transaction can be actualized in the form of movement of material goods and money.

We can consider the names of God as emitters sending out virtual offer waves and us as potential absorbers capable of sending out confirmation waves, and there is a possibility of a transaction. The energetic implications of such transactions are far from being known - but we do know from mathematical treatment of quantum mechanics that to explain experimental observations, virtual particles which break known laws of physics are often inferred. It could be speculated that such inferred virtual particles which reside outside of our known space-time universe can perhaps be the agents transferring something into the noumenal realm in the process of transaction and thus playing a role in the "reciprocal feeding" principle between higher and lower realms as postulated by G.

fwiw
 
[quote author=Altair]
There is something I don't get. If God is Absolute and perfect in all aspects, how can divine names benefit from the fact that somebody offers a possibility to manifest their properties?
[/quote]

If the realm of divine names represents 6D, then maybe we can get an answer if we look closely at some of the statements the C's have made, i.e. they serve self through others, or in other words it's just the nature of their being. If I understood Ibn Arabi correctly the names are not God/Absolute/Essence, I'm guessing that would be 7D? So by serving others or putting others on the step behind them, they would benefit by getting closer to 7D.
 
obyvatel said:
[quote author=Altair]
There is something I don't get. If God is Absolute and perfect in all aspects, how can divine names benefit from the fact that somebody offers a possibility to manifest their properties?

This is a big question. Volumes can be and has been written about this question.

One way of exploring it is to negate the assumption that there is a being God who is absolute and perfect in all respects. Considering this would be heresy in olden days - something serious enough for people to killed. On the positive side, considering God as absolute and perfect was a way of keeping human self-importance in check.

Starting with the assumption that God is not perfect, one can speculate that God needs creation as a means of manifesting his names. Gurdjieff developed this idea in his Beelzebub's Tales. In his allegory he mentioned that the dwelling place of God, the most holy Sun Absolute, was found to be diminishing in volume with the passage of the merciless Heropass (time). This necessitated a change in "laws" - from Autoegocrat (interpreted as I-hold-everything-in-my-control) to Trogoautoegocrat (interpreted as I-hold-together-by-reciprocal-feeding). This implies a feedback loop of mutual sustenance set up between God and creation.

As regards the mechanism of this reciprocal feeding, Gurdjieff introduced more special terms in Beelzebub's Tales. Here is an interpretation from JG Bennett, a student of G.

[quote author=JG Bennett in Talks on Beelzebub's Tales ]

When we undertake something that is to bring order, it requires effort and energy. This has to come from somewhere and something is transmitted to the task. To bring order deliberately, through an act of will, liberates conscious energy. When we undertake this, we give ourselves to the task and put ourselves under its demands. Part of the energy involved goes into the task . We can see that something has been achieved. What we do not see is that something has gone to serve a higher purpose.
......
Whenever we do conscious work, the energy divides into three. One part is the energy that goes into bringing about the visible result and this includes the material energies involved. The second part is liberated for some cosmic purpose. This is not like ordinary energy, it is energy that can be used by higher powers. The third part— connected with helkdonis— is that in which we come closer to our own source or to God. Something is added to our own being.

[/quote]

Bringing order through conscious effort can be called syntropy - the opposite of entropy. The noumenal realm, which is beyond space-time is where archetypes or the names of God exist. The names of God seek to express themselves in phenomenal world of space-time. Certain expressions happen regularly and do not need conscious agency. However, certain expressions need appropriate conscious agents for realization in the phenomenal world of space-time. If such conscious agents are available, then a transaction takes place between a particular name of God in the noumenal realm and the agent and the result of the transaction is an event in the space-time phenomenal world. And somehow this transaction leads to reciprocal feeding between the realms.

The material aspect of such transactions is the observable part - it is what is visible as a task completed, change in state etc.

What G called helkdonis - the part that adds to one's own being as a result of the transactional process - could correspond to what Ibn Al Arabi called "stations", the earnings of conscious labor. This is not strictly measurable but can be qualitatively felt and possibly shared as subjective experience.

We do not know what part goes back to the higher source but if G is correct, then that is the part which makes the divine names benefit from being manifested. Our sciences are still some way from fully understanding the non-material implications of such transactions.

<My speculations (warning: measures high on the out-on-a-limb meter)>

Borrowing some terms from the transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics (TIQM), a transaction involves a virtual "offer wave" from an emitter and a virtual "confirmation wave" from a potential absorber. If the process proceeds, then the transaction is realized in space-time as a measurable exchange of energies. An analogy would be an e-bay transaction with a seller (emitter) sending out an offer wave. If there are responses and subsequent resolution from the bidding process, a confirmation wave is generated from a buyer (absorber). These transactions are taking place in the virtual realm since no real material exchange has taken place yet. If the deal is closed, only then a transaction can be actualized in the form of movement of material goods and money.

We can consider the names of God as emitters sending out virtual offer waves and us as potential absorbers capable of sending out confirmation waves, and there is a possibility of a transaction. The energetic implications of such transactions are far from being known - but we do know from mathematical treatment of quantum mechanics that to explain experimental observations, virtual particles which break known laws of physics are often inferred. It could be speculated that such inferred virtual particles which reside outside of our known space-time universe can perhaps be the agents transferring something into the noumenal realm in the process of transaction and thus playing a role in the "reciprocal feeding" principle between higher and lower realms as postulated by G.

fwiw

[/quote]

Thank you, obyvatel. Much food for thought.
 
Anthony said:
[quote author=Altair]
There is something I don't get. If God is Absolute and perfect in all aspects, how can divine names benefit from the fact that somebody offers a possibility to manifest their properties?

If the realm of divine names represents 6D, then maybe we can get an answer if we look closely at some of the statements the C's have made, i.e. they serve self through others, or in other words it's just the nature of their being.
[/quote]

I thought of that too. My assumption is that perhaps these Creator and STO aspects are intrinsic property of God's Essence in order to sustain a constant creative (mutually enriching) feedback loop between God and his creation as mentioned by obyvatel.


If I understood Ibn Arabi correctly the names are not God/Absolute/Essence

As far as I understood, divine names are just expression of the properties of God's Essence in cosmos, since his creation never can get to know God's Essence directly but only through secondary causes as divine acts and divine names.
 
About Good and Evil

... we will see why evil is real on its own level, a fact which necessitates the setting up of the Scale of Law. Man faces a predicament as real as himself, and he is forced by his own nature to choose between the straight path which leads to balance, harmony and felicity and the crooked path which lead to imbalance, disequilibrium, and wretchedness.

"Ignorance" consists of the lack of knowledge, nothing else. Hence it is not an ontological quality. Nonexistence is evil.. Were it an ontologival quality, its coming into existence would go back to God, since there is no agent but God... The Real possesses Nondelimited Being without any delimitation. He is sheer good without any evil. He stands opposite nondelimited nothingness, which is sheer evil without any good.

All creatures have to earn their right to exist or go back to nonexistence:

At root the creatures are immutable entities dwelling in nonexistence, which is evil. God in respect of His all-embracing mercy gives them existence in order to bring them from evil into good. Man hangs between good and evil...

"Evil" is failure to reach one's individual desire and what is agreeable to one's nature. It stems from the fact that the thing's possibility does not prevent it from becoming connected to to nonexistence. To this extent evil becomes manifest within the cosmos. Hence it only becomes manifest from the direction of the possible thing, not from the direction of God.
 
The divine commands

Though there is no evil in Being, the existent things suffer evil to the extent they fail to share in Being. Hence the way to avoid evil is to seek refuge from it in Being...

From the point of view of Sheer Being, there is nothing but good. But as soon as existence is taken into account, good is by definition mixed with evil. In actual fact, human beings are faced with choices between good and evil. They do not dwell with Sheer Being, so they cannot say that nothing exists but good. Since they have been placed within the cosmos in a context of other existing things, they are forced to choose among alternatives and these...will offer choices among the good, the better, the bad, and the worse. Though goods and evils all manifest God as Sheer Good, in relationship to the criteria set up by the natures of things and willed by God they cannot be considered equivalent in respect to human beings. Hence we cannot escape the reality of good and evil in our actual situation...

... In respect of the first command, God says "Be!" and the whole cosmos comes into existence. In respect of the second, He says to human beings, "Do this and avoid that, or you will fall into wretchedness". The first command is known as "engendering command", while the second is known as the "prescriptive command". All created things obey the engendering command, so in this respect there is no evil in existence. But when the prescriptive command - the revealed Law - is taken into account, then some obey and some disobey. People bring both good and evil down upon themselves in respect of the prescriptive command...

The engendering command is God's "desire" for creation... Nothing can disobey God's desire, but man and jinn are free to disobey the command whereby He prescribes the Law for them.

Since man follows the engendering command in any case, it is the prescriptive command which brings into existence the possibility of opposing God.
 
The Perfection of Imperfection

If the engendering command alone is considered, there is no imperfection in the cosmos, since all creatures follow what God desires from them. In this respect, what is normally called "imperfection" is in fact perfection, since it allows for the actualiziation of the various levels of existence and knowledge. In other words, were there no imperfections - in the sense of diminishment, decrease and lack - there would be no creation. Were there no creation, the Hidden Treasure would remain hidden. Hence Being would be unseen in every respect. There would be no self-disclosure of the Divine Reality, Light would not shine, God would be the Nonmanifest but not the Manifest. But all this is absurd, since it demands the imperfection of Being Itself which by definition is nondelimited perfection. Being's perfection requires the manifestation of Its properties. The effects of the names and attributes must be displayed for God to be God.

In short, the nondelimited perfection of the Divine Reality is made possible only by the existence of imperfection, which is to say that this "imperfection" is demanded by existence itself. To be "other than God" is to be imperfect. it is to lack divine names, beginning with Being. But it is precisely the "otherness" which allows the cosmos and all the creatures within it to exists. If the things were perfect in every respect, they would be identical with God Himself, and there would be nothing "other than God". But then we could not even speak about the cosmos, since there would be no cosmos and no speakers. Hence it is imperfection which separates the creatures from theit Creator and makes possible the existence of the cosmos. Imperfection is itself a kind of perfection.

Without imperfection, existence's perfection could not be actualized. All things are "imperfect" and thereby perfectly adapted to the roles they play in creation. In their roles as human beings, those who have not attained to the station of human perfection are no less perfect than other creatures. However, because of the peculiar human situation, people are born with the possibility of actualizing a second kind of perfection. Unlike other creatures, they are not fixed in a specific ontological situation, but can change their situation through the gifts they have been given - such as knowledge, desire and speech - by following the prescriptive command, the Scale of the Law.

.. No imperfection has become manifest within the cosmos except in man. That is because he brings together all the realities of the cosmos....

"God gives to each thing its creation," and thereby it is complete, "then He guides" to the acquisition of perfection. He who is guided reaches perfection, but he who stops with his completion has been deprived.

Well, that's pretty revealing and perfectly answers my question from the one of the previous posts (http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,13425.msg571705.html#msg571705):

There is something I don't get. If God is Absolute and perfect in all aspects, how can divine names benefit from the fact that somebody offers a possibility to manifest their properties? Or generally speaking, if the whole Universe is a school where we learn to know the God disguised as divine names, what is the point of all this? Can the God know Himself through us, even if He is an Absolute? Or is this the aspect which belongs to His Essence and we'll never get it?
 
Merci pour cette page que je découvre, si intéressante...

Thank you for this page that I discover, so interesting ...
 
Reviving this thread as I'm returning to The Sufi Path of knowledge and have grown a bit curious about this issue of 'godfearingness'.

Here's one quote:

Chittick said:
Opening is not a goal that every disciple will reach. The least of the necessary qualifications is the "godfearingness" referred to earlier, an attribute which Muslims have always perceived as the epitome of human perfection. As the Koran says, "The most noble among you in God's eyes is the most godfearing"

As I'm sure many are familiar, to be 'godfearing' is an element in Christianity as well, particularly among Evangelicals. I have long assumed that this is a means of control and a dark side of religion. It may be that (and probably is), but I am wondering if it may also be more and if there is something objectively useful in it. I also wonder if to be 'godfearing' is something different than what I initially thought it to be. That is, perhaps 'fear' when directed toward 'God', may not actually be fear as we commonly think?

Some of my curiousity in exploring this is that fear and excitement (which both contain the same physiological response) are fundamental elements of the criminal or predator's mind. If that energy is directed toward what is greater rather than what is lower, would that then be a proper and purposeful utility? Some Christians define the fear of God as not being scared of God, but a reverence, respect, or a surrender to the Divine. Here, I think it is also important to consider Paul's letter on love, because if "I have all faith so as to move mountains, but do not have love (knowledge), I gain nothing." Interestingly, al-Arabi also states that one needs to have 'godfearingness' to gain wisdom. On the surface level this may relate to putting the false personality in its place, which assumes rightiousness, vanity, and variations of selfishness that block our ability to gain knowledge and see truth and reality.

I'm curious what others think of this.
 
As I'm sure many are familiar, to be 'godfearing' is an element in Christianity as well, particularly among Evangelicals. I have long assumed that this is a means of control and a dark side of religion. It may be that (and probably is), but I am wondering if it may also be more and if there is something objectively useful in it. I also wonder if to be 'godfearing' is something different than what I initially thought it to be. That is, perhaps 'fear' when directed toward 'God', may not actually be fear as we commonly think?

Some of my curiousity in exploring this is that fear and excitement (which both contain the same physiological response) are fundamental elements of the criminal or predator's mind. If that energy is directed toward what is greater rather than what is lower, would that then be a proper and purposeful utility? Some Christians define the fear of God as not being scared of God, but a reverence, respect, or a surrender to the Divine. Here, I think it is also important to consider Paul's letter on love, because if "I have all faith so as to move mountains, but do not have love (knowledge), I gain nothing." Interestingly, al-Arabi also states that one needs to have 'godfearingness' to gain wisdom. On the surface level this may relate to putting the false personality in its place, which assumes rightiousness, vanity, and variations of selfishness that block our ability to gain knowledge and see truth and reality.

I'm curious what others think of this.
A couple things come to mind from Dabrowski:
Abély says: “I met in my life, especially in artistic milieus, neurotic individuals of great talent, who, fortunately remained neurotic throughout their lives. A few months ago I heard an inaugural presidential address during a congress in Strasbourg in which Prof. Neyrac gave a talk on the anxiety of St. Exupéry. He said something along these lines: “This fear was of a special kind. It means the elevation of personality in its development. Such anxieties are instrumental in raising one to a higher level and a physician should approach them with prudence and respect.’”
FEAR, DREAD AND ANXIETY Level V At this level there are anxieties over one’s own imperfections, anxieties of not knowing the absolute, anxieties arising in states of strong psychic tension connected with the search for philosophical and mystical yet empirical solutions. Anxieties arise as a result of difficulties in reaching these solutions.
So I think fear of God, in a positive sense, can be something like fear of not understanding ultimate reality, and not living up to one's potential "in God's eyes." Or a fear of falling out of alignment with a higher purpose (i.e. God's).
 
Back
Top Bottom