View allAll Photos Tagged metaphysics
The subtle surprises go on and on in this amazing painting.
On first glance, just a very nice still life and then the realization that there is more here than 1st thought. The Toy Horses are real or are they? The smoke from the incenseis just smoke, but no it is alive and populated with women.
The flowered wallpaper becomes real as the falling leaves come forward into the foreground. JUST a Still Life? I THINK NOT!
Very Little information available on the artist, but a superb example none the less.
Oil on Board with beautiful Painterly Brush Stroke application of paint.
Signed on front in Upper Right Corner "M. Ratliff" and signed on back in pen "C Margaret Ratliff 1982"
THIS PHOTOGRAPH IS AVAILABLE FOR SALE AT MY ETSY SHOP
Crow Creek Vintage
www.etsy.com/shop/crowcreekvintage
www.etsy.com/listing/90102121/surreal-metaphysical-painti...
Analogous/representative/metaphorical of everything. Everything!
A representation of evolution and connectedness and of all things, all ideas.
Physical and abstract. Nothing and everything. Zero and infinity.
The image reflected upon itself. And in doing so, another image formed, and another, in infinite regress. (Here as humans, we look at the world and recreate it in the mind as an evolving, working simulation and are ourselves part of this image of our reality).
All things, all ideas, all people are connected. The past and future exist simultaneously as locations, places in spacetime.
The pasts fall behind, unseen and unknown but unchanged.
Everything is different and the same.
Its not "real", not a photo. its a drawn dichotomous fractal plus photo editor.
[ A reflection of an image in my mind that was reflecting an image of the outside reality : ) ok its getting ridiculous, I know! ]
Surrealist,Metaphysics Painter. www.tuttartpitturasculturapoesiamusica.com/2011/12/vito-c...
La forza del fantastico:
iicbuenosaires.esteri.it/iic_buenosaires/it/gli_eventi/ca...
In City of Light Sarajevo 1993; .
OPUS: Look Homeward, Angel; .
From Grand OPUS; Sarajevo City of Light,.
SARAJEVO WAR 1993; .
BOSNIA in Tragic WAR,.
POETIC Beauty and Strength of the Human Spirit,.
Picture is based on light and darkness counterpoints, with elements of Chiaroscuro. Strong, dramatic expression, while ... acutely observed realism brought a new level of emotional intensity, Observation of physical and psychological reality… Symbolism, Transcendental ART, Metaphysics ART, Perception beyond Appearance’s, .
City Life and Street Scenes, POETIC TransRealism; .
"There the sun doesn’t shine, or the moon, or the stars, nor any earthly fire....
In Its light, invisible; in a secret place,.
In the heart It resides." .
ARTIST Mirza Ajanovic POETIC Photography,.
Atell Rohlandt
atellpsychictarot.com online tarot and psychic readings via skype, phone, email, or whatsapp
online tarot reader, psychic advisor and reiki healer available worldwide via phone, skype, email, or whatsapp. crystal healing, color therapy, or flower remedies consultations available as well as dream analysis, nutritional advice and spiritual counseling. Get assistance with any concerns. Whether it's about relationships, finance, career, or health complaints, atellpsychictarot.com is where you'll find good advice, accurate readings, and metaphysical suggestions at reasonable rates.
Metaphysics on a wall
My consciousness Exists in 3 dimensional space in a linear fashion (i.e. time)
I am a fifth dimensional entity experiencing time in the fourth and everyhting else in the third.
i101307 059
Uspomena;.
OPUS: Look Homeward Angel, .
From Grand OPUS; Sarajevo City of Light,.
SARAJEVO WAR 1992; .
BOSNIA in Tragic WAR,.
POETIC Beauty and Strength of the Human Spirit,.
Picture is based on light and darkness counterpoints, with elements of Chiaroscuro. Strong, dramatic expression, while ... acutely observed realism brought a new level of emotional intensity, Observation of physical and psychological reality… Symbolism, Transcendental ART, Metaphysics ART, Perception beyond Appearance’s, .
City Life and Street Scenes, POETIC TransRealism; .
"There the sun doesn’t shine, or the moon, or the stars, nor any earthly fire....
In Its light, invisible; in a secret place,.
In the heart It resides." .
ARTIST Mirza Ajanovic POETIC Photography,.
Metaphysics and the Origin of Species by Michael Ghiselin
I bought this at HQ books in Medford, Oregon
seawt10 109
Born to See, Portrait of ARTIST Nizar Ajanovic; (BRAIN-POP ART, Badass ART, Self Exploration …), Nizar was seven days old … His First Bath… Sarajevo July 1994… WAR… City Shudders under Heavy Bombing… Nizar did not cry… Hi Looked at Me… .
.
Born To See, SARAJEVO; WAR, POETIC Beauty and Strength of the Human Spirit, FROM OPUS; Sarajevo City of Light, MIRZA AJANOVIC Photography,.
SARAJEVO WAR 1994; Gateway of Hell.
BOSNIA in Tragic WAR, .
Picture is based on light and darkness counterpoints, with elements of Chiaroscuro. Strong, dramatic expression, while ... acutely observed realism brought a new level of emotional intensity, Observation of physical and psychological reality… Symbolism, Metaphysics ART, POETIC Photography, Perception beyond Appearance’s, City Life, Street Scenes, City Life and Street Scenes,.
Artist MIRZA AJANOVIC Photography, Fine ART Photography,.
giorgio de chirico metaphysische Malerei geschichtet / giorgio de chirico pittura metafisica stratificata / giorgio de chirico metaphysical painting layered / giorgio de chirico 形而上学分层绘画 / Джорджо де Кирико многослойная метафизическая живопись
giorgio de chirico metaphysische Malerei geschichtet / giorgio de chirico pittura metafisica stratificata / giorgio de chirico metaphysical painting layered / giorgio de chirico 形而上学分层绘画 / Джорджо де Кирико многослойная метафизическая живопись
In monotheism, God is conceived of as the Supreme Being and principal object of faith.[3] The concept of God as described by most theologians includes the attributes of omniscience (infinite knowledge), omnipotence (unlimited power), omnipresence (present everywhere), divine simplicity, and as having an eternal and necessary existence. Many theologians also describe God as being omnibenevolent (perfectly good), and all loving.
God is most often held to be non-corporeal,[3] and to be without any human biological sex,[4][5] yet the concept of God actively creating the universe (as opposed to passively)[6] has caused many religions to describe God using masculine terminology, using such terms as "Him" or "Father". Furthermore, some religions (such as Judaism) attribute only a purely grammatical "gender" to God.[7]
In theism, God is the creator and sustainer of the universe, while in deism, God is the creator, but not the sustainer, of the universe. In pantheism, God is the universe itself. In atheism, God is not believed to exist, while God is deemed unknown or unknowable within the context of agnosticism. God has also been conceived as being incorporeal (immaterial), a personal being, the source of all moral obligation, and the "greatest conceivable existent".[3] Many notable philosophers have developed arguments for and against the existence of God.[8]
There are many names for God, and different names are attached to different cultural ideas about God's identity and attributes. In the ancient Egyptian era of Atenism, possibly the earliest recorded monotheistic religion, this deity was called Aten,[9] premised on being the one "true" Supreme Being and Creator of the Universe.[10] In the Hebrew Bible and Judaism, "He Who Is", "I Am that I Am", and the tetragrammaton YHWH (Hebrew: יהוה, which means: "I am who I am"; "He Who Exists") are used as names of God, while Yahweh and Jehovah are sometimes used in Christianity as vocalizations of YHWH. In the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, God, consubstantial in three persons, is called the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. In Judaism, it is common to refer to God by the titular names Elohim or Adonai, the latter of which is believed by some scholars to descend from the Egyptian Aten.[11][12][13][14][15] In Islam, the name Allah, "Al-El", or "Al-Elah" ("the God") is used, while Muslims also have a multitude of titular names for God. In Hinduism, Brahman is often considered a monistic deity.[16] Other religions have names for God, for instance, Baha in the Bahá'í Faith,[17] Waheguru in Sikhism,[18] and Ahura Mazda in Zoroastrianism.[19]
The many different conceptions of God, and competing claims as to God's characteristics, aims, and actions, have led to the development of ideas of omnitheism, pandeism,[20][21] or a perennial philosophy, which postulates that there is one underlying theological truth, of which all religions express a partial understanding, and as to which "the devout in the various great world religions are in fact worshipping that one God, but through different, overlapping concepts or mental images of Him."[22]
Contents [hide]
1Etymology and usage
2General conceptions
2.1Oneness
2.2Theism, deism and pantheism
2.3Other concepts
3Non-theistic views
3.1Agnosticism and atheism
3.2Anthropomorphism
4Existence
5Specific attributes
5.1Names
5.2Gender
5.3Relationship with creation
6Depiction
6.1Zoroastrianism
6.2Islam
6.3Judaism
6.4Christianity
7Theological approaches
8Distribution of belief
9See also
9.1In specific religions
10References
11Further reading
12External links
Etymology and usage
The Mesha Stele bears the earliest known reference (840 BCE) to the Israelite God Yahweh.
Main article: God (word)
The earliest written form of the Germanic word God (always, in this usage, capitalized[23]) comes from the 6th-century Christian Codex Argenteus. The English word itself is derived from the Proto-Germanic * ǥuđan. The reconstructed Proto-Indo-European form * ǵhu-tó-m was likely based on the root * ǵhau(ə)-, which meant either "to call" or "to invoke".[24] The Germanic words for God were originally neuter—applying to both genders—but during the process of the Christianization of the Germanic peoples from their indigenous Germanic paganism, the words became a masculine syntactic form.[25]
The word 'Allah' in Arabic calligraphy
In the English language, the capitalized form of God continues to represent a distinction between monotheistic "God" and "gods" in polytheism.[26][27] The English word God and its counterparts in other languages are normally used for any and all conceptions and, in spite of significant differences between religions, the term remains an English translation common to all. The same holds for Hebrew El, but in Judaism, God is also given a proper name, the tetragrammaton YHWH, in origin possibly the name of an Edomite or Midianite deity, Yahweh. In many translations of the Bible, when the word LORD is in all capitals, it signifies that the word represents the tetragrammaton.[28]
Allāh (Arabic: الله) is the Arabic term with no plural used by Muslims and Arabic speaking Christians and Jews meaning "The God" (with a capital G), while "ʾilāh" (Arabic: إله) is the term used for a deity or a god in general.[29][30][31] God may also be given a proper name in monotheistic currents of Hinduism which emphasize the personal nature of God, with early references to his name as Krishna-Vasudeva in Bhagavata or later Vishnu and Hari.[32]
Ahura Mazda is the name for God used in Zoroastrianism. "Mazda", or rather the Avestan stem-form Mazdā-, nominative Mazdå, reflects Proto-Iranian *Mazdāh (female). It is generally taken to be the proper name of the spirit, and like its Sanskrit cognate medhā, means "intelligence" or "wisdom". Both the Avestan and Sanskrit words reflect Proto-Indo-Iranian *mazdhā-, from Proto-Indo-European mn̩sdʰeh1, literally meaning "placing (dʰeh1) one's mind (*mn̩-s)", hence "wise".[33]
Waheguru (Punjabi: vāhigurū) is a term most often used in Sikhism to refer to God. It means "Wonderful Teacher" in the Punjabi language. Vāhi (a Middle Persian borrowing) means "wonderful" and guru (Sanskrit: guru) is a term denoting "teacher". Waheguru is also described by some as an experience of ecstasy which is beyond all descriptions. The most common usage of the word "Waheguru" is in the greeting Sikhs use with each other:
Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh
Wonderful Lord's Khalsa, Victory is to the Wonderful Lord.
Baha, the "greatest" name for God in the Baha'i faith, is Arabic for "All-Glorious".
General conceptions
Main article: Conceptions of God
There is no clear consensus on the nature or even the existence of God.[34] The Abrahamic conceptions of God include the monotheistic definition of God in Judaism, the trinitarian view of Christians, and the Islamic concept of God. The dharmic religions differ in their view of the divine: views of God in Hinduism vary by region, sect, and caste, ranging from monotheistic to polytheistic. Divinity was recognized by the historical Buddha, particularly Śakra and Brahma. However, other sentient beings, including gods, can at best only play a supportive role in one's personal path to salvation. Conceptions of God in the latter developments of the Mahayana tradition give a more prominent place to notions of the divine.[citation needed]
Oneness
Main articles: Monotheism and Henotheism
The Trinity is the belief that God is composed of The Father, The Son (embodied metaphysically in the physical realm by Jesus), and The Holy Spirit.
Monotheists hold that there is only one god, and may claim that the one true god is worshiped in different religions under different names. The view that all theists actually worship the same god, whether they know it or not, is especially emphasized in Hinduism[35] and Sikhism.[36] In Christianity, the doctrine of the Trinity describes God as one God in three persons. The Trinity comprises The Father, The Son (embodied metaphysically by Jesus), and The Holy Spirit.[37] Islam's most fundamental concept is tawhid (meaning "oneness" or "uniqueness"). God is described in the Quran as: "Say: He is Allah, the One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him."[38][39] Muslims repudiate the Christian doctrine of the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus, comparing it to polytheism. In Islam, God is beyond all comprehension or equal and does not resemble any of his creations in any way. Thus, Muslims are not iconodules, and are not expected to visualize God.[40]
Henotheism is the belief and worship of a single god while accepting the existence or possible existence of other deities.[41]
Theism, deism and pantheism
Main articles: Theism, Deism, and Pantheism
Theism generally holds that God exists realistically, objectively, and independently of human thought; that God created and sustains everything; that God is omnipotent and eternal; and that God is personal and interacting with the universe through, for example, religious experience and the prayers of humans.[42] Theism holds that God is both transcendent and immanent; thus, God is simultaneously infinite and in some way present in the affairs of the world.[43] Not all theists subscribe to all of these propositions, but each usually subscribes to some of them (see, by way of comparison, family resemblance).[42] Catholic theology holds that God is infinitely simple and is not involuntarily subject to time. Most theists hold that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent, although this belief raises questions about God's responsibility for evil and suffering in the world. Some theists ascribe to God a self-conscious or purposeful limiting of omnipotence, omniscience, or benevolence. Open Theism, by contrast, asserts that, due to the nature of time, God's omniscience does not mean the deity can predict the future. Theism is sometimes used to refer in general to any belief in a god or gods, i.e., monotheism or polytheism.[44][45]
"God blessing the seventh day", a watercolor painting depicting God, by William Blake (1757 – 1827)
Deism holds that God is wholly transcendent: God exists, but does not intervene in the world beyond what was necessary to create it.[43] In this view, God is not anthropomorphic, and neither answers prayers nor produces miracles. Common in Deism is a belief that God has no interest in humanity and may not even be aware of humanity. Pandeism and Panendeism, respectively, combine Deism with the Pantheistic or Panentheistic beliefs.[21][46][47] Pandeism is proposed to explain as to Deism why God would create a universe and then abandon it,[48] and as to Pantheism, the origin and purpose of the universe.[48][49]
Pantheism holds that God is the universe and the universe is God, whereas Panentheism holds that God contains, but is not identical to, the Universe.[50] It is also the view of the Liberal Catholic Church; Theosophy; some views of Hinduism except Vaishnavism, which believes in panentheism; Sikhism; some divisions of Neopaganism and Taoism, along with many varying denominations and individuals within denominations. Kabbalah, Jewish mysticism, paints a pantheistic/panentheistic view of God—which has wide acceptance in Hasidic Judaism, particularly from their founder The Baal Shem Tov—but only as an addition to the Jewish view of a personal god, not in the original pantheistic sense that denies or limits persona to God.[citation needed]
Other concepts
Dystheism, which is related to theodicy, is a form of theism which holds that God is either not wholly good or is fully malevolent as a consequence of the problem of evil. One such example comes from Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov, in which Ivan Karamazov rejects God on the grounds that he allows children to suffer.[51]
In modern times, some more abstract concepts have been developed, such as process theology and open theism. The contemporaneous French philosopher Michel Henry has however proposed a phenomenological approach and definition of God as phenomenological essence of Life.[52]
God has also been conceived as being incorporeal (immaterial), a personal being, the source of all moral obligation, and the "greatest conceivable existent".[3] These attributes were all supported to varying degrees by the early Jewish, Christian and Muslim theologian philosophers, including Maimonides,[53] Augustine of Hippo,[53] and Al-Ghazali,[8] respectively.
Non-theistic views
See also: Evolutionary origin of religions and Evolutionary psychology of religion
Non-theist views about God also vary. Some non-theists avoid the concept of God, whilst accepting that it is significant to many; other non-theists understand God as a symbol of human values and aspirations. The nineteenth-century English atheist Charles Bradlaugh declared that he refused to say "There is no God", because "the word 'God' is to me a sound conveying no clear or distinct affirmation";[54] he said more specifically that he disbelieved in the Christian god. Stephen Jay Gould proposed an approach dividing the world of philosophy into what he called "non-overlapping magisteria" (NOMA). In this view, questions of the supernatural, such as those relating to the existence and nature of God, are non-empirical and are the proper domain of theology. The methods of science should then be used to answer any empirical question about the natural world, and theology should be used to answer questions about ultimate meaning and moral value. In this view, the perceived lack of any empirical footprint from the magisterium of the supernatural onto natural events makes science the sole player in the natural world.[55]
Another view, advanced by Richard Dawkins, is that the existence of God is an empirical question, on the grounds that "a universe with a god would be a completely different kind of universe from one without, and it would be a scientific difference."[56] Carl Sagan argued that the doctrine of a Creator of the Universe was difficult to prove or disprove and that the only conceivable scientific discovery that could disprove the existence of a Creator (not necessarily a God) would be the discovery that the universe is infinitely old.[57]
Stephen Hawking and co-author Leonard Mlodinow state in their book, The Grand Design, that it is reasonable to ask who or what created the universe, but if the answer is God, then the question has merely been deflected to that of who created God. Both authors claim however, that it is possible to answer these questions purely within the realm of science, and without invoking any divine beings.[58] Neuroscientist Michael Nikoletseas has proposed that questions of the existence of God are no different from questions of natural sciences. Following a biological comparative approach, he concludes that it is highly probable that God exists, and, although not visible, it is possible that we know some of his attributes.[59]
Agnosticism and atheism
Agnosticism is the view that, the truth values of certain claims – especially metaphysical and religious claims such as whether God, the divine or the supernatural exist – are unknown and perhaps unknowable.[60][61][62]
Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities, or a God.[63][64] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[65]
Anthropomorphism
Main article: Anthropomorphism
Pascal Boyer argues that while there is a wide array of supernatural concepts found around the world, in general, supernatural beings tend to behave much like people. The construction of gods and spirits like persons is one of the best known traits of religion. He cites examples from Greek mythology, which is, in his opinion, more like a modern soap opera than other religious systems.[66] Bertrand du Castel and Timothy Jurgensen demonstrate through formalization that Boyer's explanatory model matches physics' epistemology in positing not directly observable entities as intermediaries.[67] Anthropologist Stewart Guthrie contends that people project human features onto non-human aspects of the world because it makes those aspects more familiar. Sigmund Freud also suggested that god concepts are projections of one's father.[68]
Likewise, Émile Durkheim was one of the earliest to suggest that gods represent an extension of human social life to include supernatural beings. In line with this reasoning, psychologist Matt Rossano contends that when humans began living in larger groups, they may have created gods as a means of enforcing morality. In small groups, morality can be enforced by social forces such as gossip or reputation. However, it is much harder to enforce morality using social forces in much larger groups. Rossano indicates that by including ever-watchful gods and spirits, humans discovered an effective strategy for restraining selfishness and building more cooperative groups.[69]
Existence
Main article: Existence of God
St. Thomas Aquinas summed up five main arguments as proofs for God's existence.
Isaac Newton saw the existence of a Creator necessary in the movement of astronomical objects.
Arguments about the existence of God typically include empirical, deductive, and inductive types. Different views include that: "God does not exist" (strong atheism); "God almost certainly does not exist" (de facto atheism); "no one knows whether God exists" (agnosticism[70]);"God exists, but this cannot be proven or disproven" (de facto theism); and that "God exists and this can be proven" (strong theism).[55]
Countless arguments have been proposed to prove the existence of God.[71] Some of the most notable arguments are the Five Ways of Aquinas, the Argument from Desire proposed by C.S. Lewis, and the Ontological Argument formulated both by St. Anselm and René Descartes.[72]
St. Anselm's approach was to define God as, "that than which nothing greater can be conceived". Famed pantheist philosopher Baruch Spinoza would later carry this idea to its extreme: "By God I understand a being absolutely infinite, i.e., a substance consisting of infinite attributes, of which each one expresses an eternal and infinite essence." For Spinoza, the whole of the natural universe is made of one substance, God, or its equivalent, Nature.[73] His proof for the existence of God was a variation of the Ontological argument.[74]
Scientist Isaac Newton saw God as the masterful creator whose existence could not be denied in the face of the grandeur of all creation.[75] Nevertheless, he rejected polymath Leibniz' thesis that God would necessarily make a perfect world which requires no intervention from the creator. In Query 31 of the Opticks, Newton simultaneously made an argument from design and for the necessity of intervention:
For while comets move in very eccentric orbs in all manner of positions, blind fate could never make all the planets move one and the same way in orbs concentric, some inconsiderable irregularities excepted which may have arisen from the mutual actions of comets and planets on one another, and which will be apt to increase, till this system wants a reformation.[76]
St. Thomas believed that the existence of God is self-evident in itself, but not to us. "Therefore I say that this proposition, "God exists", of itself is self-evident, for the predicate is the same as the subject.... Now because we do not know the essence of God, the proposition is not self-evident to us; but needs to be demonstrated by things that are more known to us, though less known in their nature—namely, by effects."[77] St. Thomas believed that the existence of God can be demonstrated. Briefly in the Summa theologiae and more extensively in the Summa contra Gentiles, he considered in great detail five arguments for the existence of God, widely known as the quinque viae (Five Ways).
For the original text of the five proofs, see quinque viae
Motion: Some things undoubtedly move, though cannot cause their own motion. Since there can be no infinite chain of causes of motion, there must be a First Mover not moved by anything else, and this is what everyone understands by God.
Causation: As in the case of motion, nothing can cause itself, and an infinite chain of causation is impossible, so there must be a First Cause, called God.
Existence of necessary and the unnecessary: Our experience includes things certainly existing but apparently unnecessary. Not everything can be unnecessary, for then once there was nothing and there would still be nothing. Therefore, we are compelled to suppose something that exists necessarily, having this necessity only from itself; in fact itself the cause for other things to exist.
Gradation: If we can notice a gradation in things in the sense that some things are more hot, good, etc., there must be a superlative that is the truest and noblest thing, and so most fully existing. This then, we call God (Note: Thomas does not ascribe actual qualities to God Himself).
Ordered tendencies of nature: A direction of actions to an end is noticed in all bodies following natural laws. Anything without awareness tends to a goal under the guidance of one who is aware. This we call God (Note that even when we guide objects, in Thomas's view, the source of all our knowledge comes from God as well).[78]
Alister McGrath, a formerly atheistic scientist and theologian who has been highly critical of Richard Dawkins' version of atheism
Some theologians, such as the scientist and theologian A.E. McGrath, argue that the existence of God is not a question that can be answered using the scientific method.[79][80] Agnostic Stephen Jay Gould argues that science and religion are not in conflict and do not overlap.[81]
Some findings in the fields of cosmology, evolutionary biology and neuroscience are interpreted by some atheists (including Lawrence M. Krauss and Sam Harris) as evidence that God is an imaginary entity only, with no basis in reality.[82][83][84] These atheists claim that a single, omniscient God who is imagined to have created the universe and is particularly attentive to the lives of humans has been imagined, embellished and promulgated in a trans-generational manner.[85] Richard Dawkins interprets such findings not only as a lack of evidence for the material existence of such a God, but as extensive evidence to the contrary.[55] However, his views are opposed by some theologians and scientists including Alister McGrath, who argues that existence of God is compatible with science.[86]
Neuroscientist Michael Nikoletseas has proposed that questions of the existence of God are no different from questions of natural sciences. Following a biological comparative approach, he concludes that it is highly probable that God exists, and, although not visible, it is possible that we know some of his attributes.[59]
Specific attributes
Different religious traditions assign differing (though often similar) attributes and characteristics to God, including expansive powers and abilities, psychological characteristics, gender characteristics, and preferred nomenclature. The assignment of these attributes often differs according to the conceptions of God in the culture from which they arise. For example, attributes of God in Christianity, attributes of God in Islam, and the Thirteen Attributes of Mercy in Judaism share certain similarities arising from their common roots.
Names
Main article: Names of God
99 names of Allah, in Chinese Sini (script)
The word God is "one of the most complex and difficult in the English language." In the Judeo-Christian tradition, "the Bible has been the principal source of the conceptions of God". That the Bible "includes many different images, concepts, and ways of thinking about" God has resulted in perpetual "disagreements about how God is to be conceived and understood".[87]
Throughout the Hebrew and Christian Bibles there are many names for God. One of them is Elohim. Another one is El Shaddai, meaning "God Almighty".[88] A third notable name is El Elyon, which means "The Most High God".[89]
God is described and referred in the Quran and hadith by certain names or attributes, the most common being Al-Rahman, meaning "Most Compassionate" and Al-Rahim, meaning "Most Merciful" (See Names of God in Islam).[90]
Supreme soul
The Brahma Kumaris use the term "Supreme Soul" to refer to God. They see God as incorporeal and eternal, and regard him as a point of living light like human souls, but without a physical body, as he does not enter the cycle of birth, death and rebirth. God is seen as the perfect and constant embodiment of all virtues, powers and values and that He is the unconditionally loving Father of all souls, irrespective of their religion, gender, or culture.[91]
Vaishnavism, a tradition in Hinduism, has list of titles and names of Krishna.
Gender
Main article: Gender of God
The gender of God may be viewed as either a literal or an allegorical aspect of a deity who, in classical western philosophy, transcends bodily form.[92][93] Polytheistic religions commonly attribute to each of the gods a gender, allowing each to interact with any of the others, and perhaps with humans, sexually. In most monotheistic religions, God has no counterpart with which to relate sexually. Thus, in classical western philosophy the gender of this one-and-only deity is most likely to be an analogical statement of how humans and God address, and relate to, each other. Namely, God is seen as begetter of the world and revelation which corresponds to the active (as opposed to the receptive) role in sexual intercourse.[6]
Biblical sources usually refer to God using male words, except Genesis 1:26-27,[94][95] Psalm 123:2-3, and Luke 15:8-10 (female); Hosea 11:3-4, Deuteronomy 32:18, Isaiah 66:13, Isaiah 49:15, Isaiah 42:14, Psalm 131:2 (a mother); Deuteronomy 32:11-12 (a mother eagle); and Matthew 23:37 and Luke 13:34 (a mother hen).
Relationship with creation
See also: Creator deity, Prayer, and Worship
And Elohim Created Adam by William Blake, c.1795
Prayer plays a significant role among many believers. Muslims believe that the purpose of existence is to worship God.[96][97] He is viewed as a personal God and there are no intermediaries, such as clergy, to contact God. Prayer often also includes supplication and asking forgiveness. God is often believed to be forgiving. For example, a hadith states God would replace a sinless people with one who sinned but still asked repentance.[98] Christian theologian Alister McGrath writes that there are good reasons to suggest that a "personal god" is integral to the Christian outlook, but that one has to understand it is an analogy. "To say that God is like a person is to affirm the divine ability and willingness to relate to others. This does not imply that God is human, or located at a specific point in the universe."[99]
Adherents of different religions generally disagree as to how to best worship God and what is God's plan for mankind, if there is one. There are different approaches to reconciling the contradictory claims of monotheistic religions. One view is taken by exclusivists, who believe they are the chosen people or have exclusive access to absolute truth, generally through revelation or encounter with the Divine, which adherents of other religions do not. Another view is religious pluralism. A pluralist typically believes that his religion is the right one, but does not deny the partial truth of other religions. An example of a pluralist view in Christianity is supersessionism, i.e., the belief that one's religion is the fulfillment of previous religions. A third approach is relativistic inclusivism, where everybody is seen as equally right; an example being universalism: the doctrine that salvation is eventually available for everyone. A fourth approach is syncretism, mixing different elements from different religions. An example of syncretism is the New Age movement.
Jews and Christians believe that humans are created in the likeness of God, and are the center, crown and key to God's creation, stewards for God, supreme over everything else God had made (Gen 1:26); for this reason, humans are in Christianity called the "Children of God".[100]
Depiction
God is defined as incorporeal,[3] and invisible from direct sight, and thus cannot be portrayed in a literal visual image.
The respective principles of religions may or may not permit them to use images (which are entirely symbolic) to represent God in art or in worship .
Zoroastrianism
Ahura Mazda (depiction is on the right, with high crown) presents Ardashir I (left) with the ring of kingship. (Relief at Naqsh-e Rustam, 3rd century CE)
During the early Parthian Empire, Ahura Mazda was visually represented for worship. This practice ended during the beginning of the Sassanid empire. Zoroastrian iconoclasm, which can be traced to the end of the Parthian period and the beginning of the Sassanid, eventually put an end to the use of all images of Ahura Mazda in worship. However, Ahura Mazda continued to be symbolized by a dignified male figure, standing or on horseback which is found in Sassanian investiture.[101]
Islam
Further information: God in Islam
Muslims believe that God (Allah) is beyond all comprehension or equal and does not resemble any of His creations in any way. Thus, Muslims are not iconodules, are not expected to visualize God.[40]
Judaism
At least some Jews do not use any image for God, since God is the unimageable Being who cannot be represented in material forms.[102] In some samples of Jewish Art, however, sometimes God, or at least His Intervention, is indicated by a Hand Of God symbol, which represents the bath Kol (literally "daughter of a voice") or Voice of God;[103] this use of the Hand Of God is carried over to Christian Art.
Christianity
This article may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may only interest a specific audience. Please help by spinning off or relocating any relevant information, and removing excessive detail that may be against Wikipedia's inclusion policy. (April 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Early Christians believed that the words of the Gospel of John 1:18: "No man has seen God at any time" and numerous other statements were meant to apply not only to God, but to all attempts at the depiction of God.[104]
Use of the symbolic Hand of God in the Ascension from the Drogo Sacramentary, c. 850
However, later on the Hand of God symbol is found several times in the only ancient synagogue with a large surviving decorative scheme, the Dura Europos Synagogue of the mid-3rd century, and was probably adopted into Early Christian art from Jewish art. It was common in Late Antique art in both East and West, and remained the main way of symbolizing the actions or approval of God the Father in the West until about the end of the Romanesque period. It also represents the bath Kol (literally "daughter of a voice") or voice of God,[103] just like in Jewish Art.
In situations, such as the Baptism of Christ, where a specific representation of God the Father was indicated, the Hand of God was used, with increasing freedom from the Carolingian period until the end of the Romanesque. This motif now, since the discovery of the 3rd century Dura Europos synagogue, seems to have been borrowed from Jewish art, and is found in Christian art almost from its beginnings.
The use of religious images in general continued to increase up to the end of the 7th century, to the point that in 695, upon assuming the throne, Byzantine emperor Justinian II put an image of Christ on the obverse side of his gold coins, resulting in a rift which ended the use of Byzantine coin types in the Islamic world.[105] However, the increase in religious imagery did not include depictions of God the Father. For instance, while the eighty second canon of the Council of Trullo in 692 did not specifically condemn images of The Father, it suggested that icons of Christ were preferred over Old Testament shadows and figures.[106]
The beginning of the 8th century witnessed the suppression and destruction of religious icons as the period of Byzantine iconoclasm (literally image-breaking) started. Emperor Leo III (717–741), suppressed the use of icons by imperial edict of the Byzantine Empire, presumably due to a military loss which he attributed to the undue veneration of icons.[107] The edict (which was issued without consulting the Church) forbade the veneration of religious images but did not apply to other forms of art, including the image of the emperor, or religious symbols such as the cross.[108] Theological arguments against icons then began to appear with iconoclasts arguing that icons could not represent both the divine and the human natures of Jesus at the same time. In this atmosphere, no public depictions of God the Father were even attempted and such depictions only began to appear two centuries later.
The Second Council of Nicaea in 787 effectively ended the first period of Byzantine iconoclasm and restored the honouring of icons and holy images in general.[109] However, this did not immediately translate into large scale depictions of God the Father. Even supporters of the use of icons in the 8th century, such as Saint John of Damascus, drew a distinction between images of God the Father and those of Christ.
In his treatise On the Divine Images John of Damascus wrote: "In former times, God who is without form or body, could never be depicted. But now when God is seen in the flesh conversing with men, I make an image of the God whom I see".[110] The implication here is that insofar as God the Father or the Spirit did not become man, visible and tangible, images and portrait icons can not be depicted. So what was true for the whole Trinity before Christ remains true for the Father and the Spirit but not for the Word. John of Damascus wrote:[111]
"If we attempt to make an image of the invisible God, this would be sinful indeed. It is impossible to portray one who is without body:invisible, uncircumscribed and without form."
Around 790 Charlemagne ordered a set of four books that became known as the Libri Carolini (i.e. "Charles' books") to refute what his court mistakenly understood to be the iconoclast decrees of the Byzantine Second Council of Nicaea regarding sacred images. Although not well known during the Middle Ages, these books describe the key elements of the Catholic theological position on sacred images. To the Western Church, images were just objects made by craftsmen, to be utilized for stimulating the senses of the faithful, and to be respected for the sake of the subject represented, not in themselves. The Council of Constantinople (869) (considered ecumenical by the Western Church, but not the Eastern Church) reaffirmed the decisions of the Second Council of Nicaea and helped stamp out any remaining coals of iconoclasm. Specifically, its third canon required the image of Christ to have veneration equal with that of a Gospel book:[112]
We decree that the sacred image of our Lord Jesus Christ, the liberator and Savior of all people, must be venerated with the same honor as is given the book of the holy Gospels. For as through the language of the words contained in this book all can reach salvation, so, due to the action which these images exercise by their colors, all wise and simple alike, can derive profit from them.
But images of God the Father were not directly addressed in Constantinople in 869. A list of permitted icons was enumerated at this Council, but symbols of God the Father were not among them.[113] However, the general acceptance of icons and holy images began to create an atmosphere in which God the Father could be symbolized.
Prior to the 10th century no attempt was made to use a human to symbolize God the Father in Western art.[104] Yet, Western art eventually required some way to illustrate the presence of the Father, so through successive representations a set of artistic styles for symbolizing the Father using a man gradually emerged around the 10th century AD. A rationale for the use of a human is the belief that God created the soul of Man in the image of His own (thus allowing Human to transcend the other animals).
It appears that when early artists designed to represent God the Father, fear and awe restrained them from a usage of the whole human figure. Typically only a small part would be used as the image, usually the hand, or sometimes the face, but rarely a whole human. In many images, the figure of the Son supplants the Father, so a smaller portion of the person of the Father is depicted.[114]
By the 12th century depictions of God the Father had started to appear in French illuminated manuscripts, which as a less public form could often be more adventurous in their iconography, and in stained glass church windows in England. Initially the head or bust was usually shown in some form of frame of clouds in the top of the picture space, where the Hand of God had formerly appeared; the Baptism of Christ on the famous baptismal font in Liège of Rainer of Huy is an example from 1118 (a Hand of God is used in another scene). Gradually the amount of the human symbol shown can increase to a half-length figure, then a full-length, usually enthroned, as in Giotto's fresco of c. 1305 in Padua.[115] In the 14th century the Naples Bible carried a depiction of God the Father in the Burning bush. By the early 15th century, the Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry has a considerable number of symbols, including an elderly but tall and elegant full-length figure walking in the Garden of Eden, which show a considerable diversity of apparent ages and dress. The "Gates of Paradise" of the Florence Baptistry by Lorenzo Ghiberti, begun in 1425 use a similar tall full-length symbol for the Father. The Rohan Book of Hours of about 1430 also included depictions of God the Father in half-length human form, which were now becoming standard, and the Hand of God becoming rarer. At the same period other works, like the large Genesis altarpiece by the Hamburg painter Meister Bertram, continued to use the old depiction of Christ as Logos in Genesis scenes. In the 15th century there was a brief fashion for depicting all three persons of the Trinity as similar or identical figures with the usual appearance of Christ.
In an early Venetian school Coronation of the Virgin by Giovanni d'Alemagna and Antonio Vivarini, (c. 1443) The Father is depicted using the symbol consistently used by other artists later, namely a patriarch, with benign, yet powerful countenance and with long white hair and a beard, a depiction largely derived from, and justified by, the near-physical, but still figurative, description of the Ancient of Days.[116]
. ...the Ancient of Days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. (Daniel 7:9)
Usage of two Hands of God"(relatively unusual) and the Holy Spirit as a dove in Baptism of Christ, by Verrocchio, 1472
In the Annunciation by Benvenuto di Giovanni in 1470, God the Father is portrayed in the red robe and a hat that resembles that of a Cardinal. However, even in the later part of the 15th century, the symbolic representation of the Father and the Holy Spirit as "hands and dove" continued, e.g. in Verrocchio's Baptism of Christ in 1472.[117]
God the Father with His Right Hand Raised in Blessing, with a triangular halo representing the Trinity, Girolamo dai Libri c. 1555
In Renaissance paintings of the adoration of the Trinity, God may be depicted in two ways, either with emphasis on The Father, or the three elements of the Trinity. The most usual depiction of the Trinity in Renaissance art depicts God the Father using an old man, usually with a long beard and patriarchal in appearance, sometimes with a triangular halo (as a reference to the Trinity), or with a papal crown, specially in Northern Renaissance painting. In these depictions The Father may hold a globe or book (to symbolize God's knowledge and as a reference to how knowledge is deemed divine). He is behind and above Christ on the Cross in the Throne of Mercy iconography. A dove, the symbol of the Holy Spirit may hover above. Various people from different classes of society, e.g. kings, popes or martyrs may be present in the picture. In a Trinitarian Pietà, God the Father is often symbolized using a man wearing a papal dress and a papal crown, supporting the dead Christ in his arms. They are depicted as floating in heaven with angels who carry the instruments of the Passion.[118]
Representations of God the Father and the Trinity were attacked both by Protestants and within Catholicism, by the Jansenist and Baianist movements as well as more orthodox theologians. As with other attacks on Catholic imagery, this had the effect both of reducing Church support for the less central depictions, and strengthening it for the core ones. In the Western Church, the pressure to restrain religious imagery resulted in the highly influential decrees of the final session of the Council of Trent in 1563. The Council of Trent decrees confirmed the traditional Catholic doctrine that images only represented the person depicted, and that veneration to them was paid to the person, not the image.[119]
Artistic depictions of God the Father were uncontroversial in Catholic art thereafter, but less common depictions of the Trinity were condemned. In 1745 Pope Benedict XIV explicitly supported the Throne of Mercy depiction, referring to the "Ancient of Days", but in 1786 it was still necessary for Pope Pius VI to issue a papal bull condemning the decision of an Italian church council to remove all images of the Trinity from churches.[120]
The famous The Creation of Adam by Michelangelo, c.1512
God the Father is symbolized in several Genesis scenes in Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel ceiling, most famously The Creation of Adam (whose image of near touching hands of God and Adam is iconic of humanity, being a reminder that Man is created in the Image and Likeness of God (Gen 1:26)).God the Father is depicted as a powerful figure, floating in the clouds in Titian's Assumption of the Virgin in the Frari of Venice, long admired as a masterpiece of High Renaissance art.[121] The Church of the Gesù in Rome includes a number of 16th century depictions of God the Father. In some of these paintings the Trinity is still alluded to in terms of three angels, but Giovanni Battista Fiammeri also depicted God the Father as a man riding on a cloud, above the scenes.[122]
In both the Last Judgment and the Coronation of the Virgin paintings by Rubens he depicted God the Father using the image that by then had become widely accepted, a bearded patriarchal figure above the fray. In the 17th century, the two Spanish artists Velázquez (whose father-in-law Francisco Pacheco was in charge of the approval of new images for the Inquisition) and Murillo both depicted God the Father using a patriarchal figure with a white beard in a purple robe.
The Ancient of Days (1794) Watercolor etching by William Blake
While representations of God the Father were growing in Italy, Spain, Germany and the Low Countries, there was resistance elsewhere in Europe, even during the 17th century. In 1632 most members of the Star Chamber court in England (except the Archbishop of York) condemned the use of the images of the Trinity in church windows, and some considered them illegal.[123] Later in the 17th century Sir Thomas Browne wrote that he considered the representation of God the Father using an old man "a dangerous act" that might lead to Egyptian symbolism.[124] In 1847, Charles Winston was still critical of such images as a "Romish trend" (a term used to refer to Roman Catholics) that he considered best avoided in England.[125]
In 1667 the 43rd chapter of the Great Moscow Council specifically included a ban on a number of symbolic depictions of God the Father and the Holy Spirit, which then also resulted in a whole range of other icons being placed on the forbidden list,[126][127] mostly affecting Western-style depictions which had been gaining ground in Orthodox icons. The Council also declared that the person of the Trinity who was the "Ancient of Days" was Christ, as Logos, not God the Father. However some icons continued to be produced in Russia, as well as Greece, Romania, and other Orthodox countries.
Theological approaches
Theologians and philosophers have attributed to God such characteristics as omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, perfect goodness, divine simplicity, and eternal and necessary existence. God has been described as incorporeal, a personal being, the source of all moral obligation, and the greatest conceivable being existent.[3] These attributes were all claimed to varying degrees by the early Jewish, Christian and Muslim scholars, including Maimonides,[53] St Augustine,[53] and Al-Ghazali.[128]
Many philosophers developed arguments for the existence of God,[8] while attempting to comprehend the precise implications of God's attributes. Reconciling some of those attributes generated important philosophical problems and debates. For example, God's omniscience may seem to imply that God knows how free agents will choose to act. If God does know this, their ostensible free will might be illusory, or foreknowledge does not imply predestination, and if God does not know it, God may not be omniscient.[129]
However, if by its essential nature, free will is not predetermined, then the effect of its will can never be perfectly predicted by anyone, regardless of intelligence and knowledge. Although knowledge of the options presented to that will, combined with perfectly infinite intelligence, could be said to provide God with omniscience if omniscience is defined as knowledge or understanding of all that is.
The last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the arguments for God's existence raised by such philosophers as Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew, although Kant held that the argument from morality was valid. The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is "properly basic", or to take, as does Richard Swinburne, the evidentialist position.[130] Some theists agree that only some of the arguments for God's existence are compelling, but argue that faith is not a product of reason, but requires risk. There would be no risk, they say, if the arguments for God's existence were as solid as the laws of logic, a position summed up by Pascal as "the heart has reasons of which reason does not know."[131] A recent theory using concepts from physics and neurophysiology proposes that God can be conceptualized within the theory of integrative level.[132]
Many religious believers allow for the existence of other, less powerful spiritual beings such as angels, saints, jinn, demons, and devas.[133][134][135][136][137]
metaphysical still life 1
supplementary photos for an article on astrology by michael sinclair
feb. 2011 Little Village Magazine
littlevillagemag.com
wholesale chakra jewelry,metaphysical stores,new age stores,chakra jewelry,wholesale rune sets,chakra meditation,chakra pendant,rough gemstones,moss agate rough,crystal wands,tumbled stones wholesale,agate exports,Indian arrowheads,agate beads,Wholesale pendulums,Chakra bracelets,Healing pendants-Agate Export,Khambhat,Gujarat,India
For More Details Please Visit Us at : www.agateexport.net
Pyrite, otherwise known as “fool’s gold,” is an iron sulfide compound with a cubic “crystal habit.” The crystal habit refers to the external shape of a crystal, and thus you can see the nigh-perfect cube in this particular sample. Not even nature gets it right all the time. ☺ Metaphysically, pyrite is known as a protective, shielding stone that is an excellent amulet against harm and danger
Trees, especially without leaves have always fascinated me. They almost seem animated and there is certainly something metaphysical about them. These trees from the Enchanted Forest set were all photographed in Toronto. Although they represent only a small portion of the selection that is available to the observer as he explores the city, each has caught my eye due to some particularly unique quality which it displays. I tend to prefer capturing older specimens which reveal the signs of aging as we all do as we get on in years. Like us, trees are exceptionally adaptable and will grow through a fence that is in its way, making the obstructing fence part of the tree itself, or it will continue to thrive when hollowed out by disease, rot or creatures and when broken or burned by such as lightning, it will stubbornly cling to life and continue to provide shelter to those who seek safety beneath its branches.
My photos, art and videos are now available from my website for use as royalty free stock for advertising, movies, or many other applications.
ronzig@rogers.com
View my Portfolio, References and Upcoming Shows
If you have an event to record or need other photography services or would like to purchase a print of one of my works please contact me.
Prints of any of my images are available in 11 x 14 or 13 x 19 sizes on glossy photo paper or on canvas. They are also available as 4 x 6 postcards or embedded on the glaze on 4 x 4, 6 x 6 or 6 x 8 ceramic tiles.
View my activism website where I explore the issues of homelessness, poverty, addiction and other social diseases which may all be traced back to one problem.
Down, But Not Out
View the ongoing saga of Ronzig The Wizard
All rights reserved.
Over a century ago, a young boy left Wales and journeyed to America, where he started a small press, now known as Llewellyn Worldwide. Llewellyn George's adventurous spirit and Welsh heritage embodies The Llewellyn Tarot, which also celebrates the publisher's enduring legacy.
This lavishly illustrated deck offers universal appeal (based on Rider-Waite) with a Welsh twist. A compelling story unfolds starring Rhiannon as The Empress, Bran the Blessed as The Emperor, The Wild Herdsman as The Horned God (the Devil), Gwydion as The Magician, Llew Llaw Gyffes as the Bringer of Light, and other figures from Welsh mythology.
Click here for a free online Tarot reading.
Music for an advanced minority of people. Metaphysical images, the depths of space, mind and consciousness, as well as light melodic tunes for relaxation. The podcast is published once in two months, is created by a young team SYMP. Send rays of good, happy listening!
Please subscribe to our channel., and also follow the releases on promodj.com/saiboot
Hindu deities are the gods and goddesses in Hinduism. The terms and epithets found in Indian culture, that are translated as deity, varies with the text and diverse traditions within Hinduism, and include Deva, Devi, Ishvara, Bhagavan and Bhagavathi.[1][2][note 1]
The deities of Hinduism have evolved from Vedic era (2nd millennium BCE) through medieval era (1st millennium CE), regionally within India and in southeast Asia, and across Hinduism's diverse traditions.[3][4] The Hindu deity concept varies from a personal god as in Yoga school of Hindu philosophy,[5][6] to 33 Vedic deities,[7] to hundreds of Puranic deities, to millions of deities in Tantra traditions of Hinduism.[8] Illustrations of major deities include Vishnu, Sri (Lakshmi), Shiva, Parvati (Durga), Brahma and Saraswati. These deities have distinct and complex personalities, yet often viewed as aspects of the same Ultimate Reality called Brahman.[9][note 2] From ancient times, the idea of equivalence has been cherished in Hinduism, in its texts and in early 1st millennium sculpture with concepts such as Harihara (half Shiva, half Vishnu),[10] Ardhanarishvara (half Shiva, half Parvati) or Vaikuntha Kamalaja (half Vishnu, half Lakshmi),[11] with mythologies and temples that feature them together, declaring they are the same.[12][13][14] Major deities have inspired their own Hindu traditions, such as Vaishnavism, Shaivism and Shaktism, but with shared mythology, ritual grammar, theosophy, axiology and polycentrism.[15][16][17] Some Hindu traditions such as Smartism from mid 1st millennium CE, have included multiple major deities as henotheistic manifestations of Saguna Brahman, and as a means to realizing Nirguna Brahman.[18][19][20]
Hindu deities are represented with various icons and anicons, in paintings and sculptures, called Murtis and Pratimas.[21][22][23] Some Hindu traditions, such as ancient Charvakas rejected all deities and concept of god or goddess,[24][25][26] while 19th-century British colonial era movements such as the Arya Samaj and Brahmo Samaj rejected deities and adopted monotheistic concepts similar to Abrahamic religions.[27][28] Hindu deities have been adopted in other religions such as Jainism,[29] and in regions outside India such as predominantly Buddhist Thailand and Japan where they continue to be revered in regional temples or arts.[30][31][32]
In ancient and medieval era texts of Hinduism, the human body is described as a temple,[33][34] and deities are described to be parts residing within it,[35][36] while the Brahman (Absolute Reality, God)[18][37] is described to be the same, or of similar nature, as the Atman (self, soul), which Hindus believe is eternal and within every living being.[38][39][40] Deities in Hinduism are as diverse as its traditions, and a Hindu can choose to be polytheistic, pantheistic, monotheistic, monistic, agnostic, atheistic or humanist.[41][42][43]
Deities in Hinduism are referred to as Deva (masculine) and Devi (feminine).[44][45][46] The root of these terms mean "heavenly, divine, anything of excellence".[47] According to Douglas Harper, the etymological roots of Deva mean "a shining one," from *div- "to shine," and it is a cognate with Greek dios "divine" and Zeus, and Latin deus (Old Latin deivos).[48]
In the earliest Vedic literature, all supernatural beings are called Asuras.[49][50] By the late Vedic period (~500 BCE), benevolent supernatural beings are referred to as Deva-Asuras. In post-Vedic texts, such as the Puranas and the Itihasas of Hinduism, the Devas represent the good, and the Asuras the bad.[3][4] In some medieval Indian literature, Devas are also referred to as Suras and contrasted with their equally powerful, but malevolent half-brothers referred to as the Asuras.[51]
Hindu deities are part of Indian mythology, both Devas and Devis feature in one of many cosmological theories in Hinduism.[52][53]
Characteristics of Vedic era deities[edit]
In Vedic literature, Devas and Devis represent the forces of nature and some represent moral values (such as the Adityas, Varuna, and Mitra), each symbolizing the epitome of a specialized knowledge, creative energy, exalted and magical powers (Siddhis).[54][55]
The most referred to Devas in the Rig Veda are Indra, Agni (fire) and Soma, with "fire deity" called the friend of all humanity, it and Soma being the two celebrated in a yajna fire ritual that marks major Hindu ceremonies. Savitr, Vishnu, Rudra (later given the exclusive epithet of Shiva), and Prajapati (later Brahma) are gods and hence Devas.[30]
The Vedas describes a number of significant Devis such as Ushas (dawn), Prithvi (earth), Aditi (cosmic moral order), Saraswati (river, knowledge), Vāc (sound), Nirṛti (destruction), Ratri (night), Aranyani (forest), and bounty goddesses such as Dinsana, Raka, Puramdhi, Parendi, Bharati, Mahi among others are mentioned in the Rigveda.[58] Sri, also called Lakshmi, appears in late Vedic texts dated to be pre-Buddhist, but verses dedicated to her do not suggest that her characteristics were fully developed in the Vedic era.[59] All gods and goddesses are distinguished in the Vedic times, but in the post-Vedic texts (~500 BCE to 200 CE), and particularly in the early medieval era literature, they are ultimately seen as aspects or manifestations of one Brahman, the Supreme power.[59][60]
Ananda Coomaraswamy states that Devas and Asuras in the Vedic lore are similar to Angels-Theoi-Gods and Titans of Greek mythology, both are powerful but have different orientations and inclinations, the Devas representing the powers of Light and the Asuras representing the powers of Darkness in Hindu mythology.[61][62] According to Coomaraswamy's interpretation of Devas and Asuras, both these natures exist in each human being, the tyrant and the angel is within each being, the best and the worst within each person struggles before choices and one's own nature, and the Hindu formulation of Devas and Asuras is an eternal dance between these within each person.[63][64]
The Devas and Asuras, Angels and Titans, powers of Light and powers of Darkness in Rigveda, although distinct and opposite in operation, are in essence consubstantial, their distinction being a matter not of essence but of orientation, revolution or transformation. In this case, the Titan is potentially an Angel, the Angel still by nature a Titan; the Darkness in actu is Light, the Light in potentia Darkness; whence the designations Asura and Deva may be applied to one and the same Person according to the mode of operation, as in Rigveda 1.163.3, "Trita art thou (Agni) by interior operation".
— Ananda Coomaraswamy, Journal of the American Oriental Society[65]
Characteristics of medieval era deities[edit]
In the Puranas and the Itihasas with the embedded Bhagavad Gita, the Devas represent the good, and the Asuras the bad.[3][4] According to the Bhagavad Gita (16.6-16.7), all beings in the universe have both the divine qualities (daivi sampad) and the demonic qualities (asuri sampad) within each.[4][66] The sixteenth chapter of the Bhagavad Gita states that pure god-like saints are rare and pure demon-like evil are rare among human beings, and the bulk of humanity is multi-charactered with a few or many faults.[4] According to Jeaneane Fowler, the Gita states that desires, aversions, greed, needs, emotions in various forms "are facets of ordinary lives", and it is only when they turn to lust, hate, cravings, arrogance, conceit, anger, harshness, hypocrisy, violence, cruelty and such negativity- and destruction-inclined that natural human inclinations metamorphose into something demonic (Asura).[4][66]
The Epics and medieval era texts, particularly the Puranas, developed extensive and richly varying mythologies associated with Hindu deities, including their genealogies.[67][68][69] Several of the Purana texts are named after major Hindu deities such as Vishnu, Shiva and Devi.[67] Other texts and commentators such as Adi Shankara explain that Hindu deities live or rule over the cosmic body as well in the temple of human body.[33][70] They remark that the Sun deity is the giver of vision, the Vayu deity the nose, the Prajapati the sexual organs, the Lokapalas (directions) are the ears, moon deity the mind, Mitra deity is the inward breath, Varuna deity is the outward breath, Indra deity the arms, Brhaspati the speech, Vishnu whose stride is great is the feet, and Maya is the smile.[70]
Symbolism[edit]
Edelmann states that gods and anti-gods of Hinduism are symbolism for spiritual concepts. For example, god Indra (a Deva) and the antigod Virocana (an Asura) question a sage for insights into the knowledge of the self.[71] Virocana leaves with the first given answer, believing now he can use the knowledge as a weapon. In contrast, Indra keeps pressing the sage, churning the ideas, and learning about means to inner happiness and power. Edelmann suggests that the Deva-Asura dichotomies in Hindu mythology may be seen as "narrative depictions of tendencies within our selves".[71] Hindu deities in Vedic era, states Mahoney, are those artists with "powerfully inward transformative, effective and creative mental powers".[72]
In Hindu mythology, everyone starts as an Asura, born of the same father. "Asuras who remain Asura" share the character of powerful beings craving for more power, more wealth, ego, anger, unprincipled nature, force and violence.[73][74] The "Asuras who become Devas" in contrast are driven by an inner voice, seek understanding and meaning, prefer moderation, principled behavior, aligned with Ṛta and Dharma, knowledge and harmony.[73][74][75]
The god (Deva) and antigod (Asura), states Edelmann, are also symbolically the contradictory forces that motivate each individual and people, and thus Deva-Asura dichotomy is a spiritual concept rather than mere genealogical category or species of being.[76] In the Bhāgavata Purana, saints and gods are born in families of Asuras, such as Mahabali and Prahlada, conveying the symbolism that motivations, beliefs and actions rather than one's birth and family circumstances define whether one is Deva-like or Asura-like.[76]
Another Hindu term that is sometimes translated as deity is Ishvara, or alternatively various deities are described, state Sorajjakool et al., as "the personifications of various aspects of one and the same Ishvara".[77] The term Ishvara has a wide range of meanings that depend on the era and the school of Hinduism.[78][79][80] In ancient texts of Indian philosophy, Ishvara means supreme soul, Brahman (Highest Reality), ruler, king or husband depending on the context.[78] In medieval era texts, Ishvara means God, Supreme Being, personal god, or special Self depending on the school of Hinduism.[2][80][81]
Among the six systems of Hindu philosophy, Samkhya and Mimamsa do not consider the concept of Ishvara, i.e., a supreme being, relevant. Yoga, Vaisheshika, Vedanta and Nyaya schools of Hinduism discuss Ishvara, but assign different meanings.
Early Nyaya school scholars considered the hypothesis of a deity as a creator God with the power to grant blessings, boons and fruits; but these early Nyaya scholars then rejected this hypothesis, and were non-theistic or atheists.[25][82] Later scholars of Nyaya school reconsidered this question and offered counter arguments for what is Ishvara and various arguments to prove the existence of omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent deity (God).[83]
Vaisheshika school of Hinduism, as founded by Kanada in 1st millennium BC, neither required nor relied on creator deity.[84][85] Later Vaisheshika school adopted the concept of Ishvara, states Klaus Klostermaier, but as an eternal God who co-exists in the universe with eternal substances and atoms, but He "winds up the clock, and lets it run its course".[84]
Ancient Mimamsa scholars of Hinduism questioned what is Ishvara (deity, God)?[86] They considered deity concept unnecessary for a consistent philosophy and moksha (soteriology).[86][87]
In Samkhya school of Hindu philosophy, Isvara is neither a creator-God, nor a savior-God.[88] This is called one of the several major atheistic schools of Hinduism by some scholars.[89][90][91] Others, such as Jacobsen, state that Samkhya is more accurately described as non-theistic.[92] Deity is considered an irrelevant concept, neither defined nor denied, in Samkhya school of Hindu philosophy.[93]
In Yoga school of Hinduism, it is any "personal deity" (Ishta Deva or Ishta Devata)[94] or "spiritual inspiration", but not a creator God.[81][89] Whicher explains that while Patanjali's terse verses in the Yogasutras can be interpreted both as theistic or non-theistic, Patanjali's concept of Isvara in Yoga philosophy functions as a "transformative catalyst or guide for aiding the yogin on the path to spiritual emancipation".[95]
The Advaita Vedanta school of Hinduism asserted that there is no dualistic existence of deity (or deities).[96][97] There is no otherness nor distinction between Jiva and Ishvara.[98][99] God (Ishvara, Brahman) is identical with the Atman (soul) within each human being in Advaita Vedanta school,[100] and there is a monistic Universal Absolute Oneness that connects everyone and everything, states this school of Hinduism.[39][99][101] This school, states Anantanand Rambachan, has "perhaps exerted the most widespread influence".[102]
The Dvaita sub-school of Vedanta Hinduism, founded in medieval era, Ishvara is defined as a creator God that is distinct from Jiva (individual souls in living beings).[40] In this school, God creates individual souls, but the individual soul never was and never will become one with God; the best it can do is to experience bliss by getting infinitely close to God.[20]
Number of deities[edit]
Yāska, the earliest known language scholar of India (~ 500 BCE), notes Wilkins, mentions that there are three deities (Devas) according to the Vedas, "Agni (fire), whose place is on the earth; Vayu (wind), whose place is the air; and Surya (sun), whose place is in the sky".[107] This principle of three worlds (or zones), and its multiples is found thereafter in many ancient texts. The Samhitas, which are the oldest layer of text in Vedas enumerate 33 devas,[note 3] either 11 each for the three worlds, or as 12 Adityas, 11 Rudras, 8 Vasus and 2 Ashvins in the Brahmanas layer of Vedic texts.[7][47]
The Rigveda states in hymn 1.139.11,
ये देवासो दिव्येकादश स्थ पृथिव्यामध्येकादश स्थ ।
अप्सुक्षितो महिनैकादश स्थ ते देवासो यज्ञमिमं जुषध्वम् ॥११॥[111]
O ye eleven gods whose home is heaven, O ye eleven who make earth your dwelling,
Ye who with might, eleven, live in waters, accept this sacrifice, O gods, with pleasure.
– Translated by Ralph T. H. Griffith[112]
Gods who are eleven in heaven; who are eleven on earth;
and who are eleven dwelling with glory in mid-air; may ye be pleased with this our sacrifice.
– Translated by HH Wilson[113]
— Rigveda 1.139.11
Millions, one or one-ness?[edit]
Thirty-three divinities are mentioned in other ancient texts, such as the Yajurveda,[114] however, there is no fixed "number of deities" in Hinduism any more than a standard representation of "deity".[115] There is, however, a popular perception stating that there are 330 million (or "33 crore") deities in Hinduism.[116] Most, by far, are goddesses, state Foulston and Abbott, suggesting "how important and popular goddesses are" in Hindu culture.[115] No one has a list of the 330 million goddesses and gods, but all deities, state scholars, are typically viewed in Hinduism as "emanations or manifestation of genderless principle called Brahman, representing the many facets of Ultimate Reality".[115][116][117]
This concept of Brahman is not the same as the monotheistic separate God found in Abrahamic religions, where God is considered, states Brodd, as "creator of the world, above and independent of human existence", while in Hinduism "God, the universe, human beings and all else is essentially one thing" and everything is connected oneness, the same god is in every human being as Atman, the eternal Self.[117][118]
Hinduism has an ancient and extensive iconography tradition, particularly in the form of Murti (Sanskrit: मूर्ति, IAST: Mūrti), or Vigraha or Pratima.[22] A Murti is itself not the god in Hinduism, but it is an image of god and represents emotional and religious value.[124] A literal translation of Murti as idol is incorrect, states Jeaneane Fowler, when idol is understood as superstitious end in itself.[124] Just like the photograph of a person is not the real person, a Murti is an image in Hinduism but not the real thing, but in both cases the image reminds of something of emotional and real value to the viewer.[124] When a person worships a Murti, it is assumed to be a manifestation of the essence or spirit of the deity, the worshipper's spiritual ideas and needs are meditated through it, yet the idea of ultimate reality or Brahman is not confined in it.[124]
A Murti of a Hindu deity is typically made by carving stone, wood working, metal casting or through pottery. Medieval era texts describing their proper proportions, positions and gestures include the Puranas, Agamas and Samhitas particularly the Shilpa Shastras.[21] The expressions in a Murti vary in diverse Hindu traditions, ranging from Ugra symbolism to express destruction, fear and violence (Durga, Kali), as well as Saumya symbolism to express joy, knowledge and harmony (Saraswati, Lakshmi). Saumya images are most common in Hindu temples.[125] Other Murti forms found in Hinduism include the Linga.[126]
A Murti is an embodiment of the divine, the Ultimate Reality or Brahman to some Hindus.[21] In religious context, they are found in Hindu temples or homes, where they may be treated as a beloved guest and serve as a participant of Puja rituals in Hinduism.[127] A murti is installed by priests, in Hindu temples, through the Prana Pratishtha ceremony,[128] whereby state Harold Coward and David Goa, the "divine vital energy of the cosmos is infused into the sculpture" and then the divine is welcomed as one would welcome a friend.[129] In other occasions, it serves as the center of attention in annual festive processions and these are called Utsava Murti.[130]
In Hinduism, deities and their icons may be hosted in a Hindu temple, within a home or as an amulet. The worship performed by Hindus is known by a number of regional names, such as Puja.[134] This practice in front of a murti may be elaborate in large temples, or be a simple song or mantra muttered in home, or offering made to sunrise or river or symbolic anicon of a deity.[135][136][137] Archaeological evidence of deity worship in Hindu temples trace Puja rituals to Gupta Empire era (~4th century CE).[138][139] In Hindu temples, various pujas may be performed daily at various times of the day; in other temples, it may be occasional.[140][141]
The Puja practice is structured as an act of welcoming, hosting, honoring the deity of one's choice as one's honored guest,[142] and remembering the spiritual and emotional significance the deity represents the devotee.[124][134] Jan Gonda, as well as Diana L. Eck, states that a typical Puja involves one or more of 16 steps (Shodasha Upachara) traceable to ancient times: the deity is invited as a guest, the devotee hosts and takes care of the deity as an honored guest, praise (hymns) with Dhupa or Aarti along with food (Naivedhya) is offered to the deity, after an expression of love and respect the host takes leave, and with affection expresses good bye to the deity.[143][144] The worship practice may also involve reflecting on spiritual questions, with image serving as support for such meditation.[145]
Deity worship (Bhakti), visiting temples and Puja rituals are not mandatory and is optional in Hinduism; it is the choice of a Hindu, it may be a routine daily affair for some Hindus, periodic ritual or infrequent for some.[146][147] Worship practices in Hinduism are as diverse as its traditions, and a Hindu can choose to be polytheistic, pantheistic, monotheistic, monistic, agnostic, atheistic or humanist.[41]
Examples[edit]
Main articles: List of Hindu deities and Rigvedic deities
Major deities have inspired a vast genre of literature such as the Puranas and Agama texts as well their own Hindu traditions, but with shared mythology, ritual grammar, theosophy, axiology and polycentrism.[16][17] Vishnu and his avatars are at the foundation of Vaishnavism, Shiva for Shaivism, Devi for Shaktism, and some Hindu traditions such as Smarta traditions who revere multiple major deities (five) as henotheistic manifestations of Brahman (absolute metaphysical Reality).[116][148][149]
While there are diverse deities in Hinduism, states Lawrence, "Exclusivism – which maintains that only one's own deity is real" is rare in Hinduism.[116] Julius Lipner, and other scholars, state that pluralism and "polycentrism" – where other deities are recognized and revered by members of different "denominations", has been the Hindu ethos and way of life.[16][150]
Trimurti and Tridevi[edit]
The concept of Triad (or Trimurti, Trinity) makes a relatively late appearance in Hindu literature, or in the second half of 1st millennium BCE.[151] The idea of triad, playing three roles in the cosmic affairs, is typically associated with Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva (also called Mahesh); however, this is not the only triad in Hindu literature.[152] Other triads include Tridevi, of three goddesses – Lakshmi, Saraswati and Durga in the text Devi Mahatmya, in the Shakta tradition, who further assert that Devi is the Brahman (Ultimate Reality) and it is her energy that empowers Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva.[151] The other triads, formulated as deities in ancient Indian literature, include Sun (creator), Air (sustainer) and Fire (destroyer); Prana (creator), Food (sustainer) and Time (destroyer).[151] These triads, states Jan Gonda, are in some mythologies grouped together without forming a Trinity, and in other times represented as equal, a unity and manifestations of one Brahman.[151] In the Puranas, for example, this idea of threefold "hypostatization" is expressed as follows,
They [Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva] exist through each other, and uphold each other; they are parts of one another; they subsist through one another; they are not for a moment separated; they never abandon one another.
— Vayu Purana, 5.17, Translated by Jan Gonda[151]
The triad appears in Maitrayaniya Upanishad, for the first time in recognized roles known ever since, where they are deployed to present the concept of three Guṇa – the innate nature, tendencies and inner forces found within every being and everything, whose balance transform and keeps changing the individual and the world.[152][153] It is in the medieval Puranic texts, Trimurti concepts appears in various context, from rituals to spiritual concepts.[151] The Bhagavad Gita, in verses 9.18, 10.21-23 and 11.15, asserts that the triad or trinity is manifestation of one Brahman, which Krishna affirms himself to be.[154] However, suggests Bailey, the mythology of triad is "not the influence nor the most important one" in Hindu traditions, rather the ideologies and spiritual concepts develop on their own foundations.[152]
Avatars of Hindu deities[edit]
Hindu mythology has nurtured the concept of Avatar, which represents the descent of a deity on earth.[155][156] This concept is commonly translated as "incarnation",[155] and is an "appearance" or "manifestation".[157][158]
The concept of Avatar is most developed in Vaishnavism tradition, and associated with Vishnu, particularly with Rama and Krishna.[159][160] Vishnu takes numerous avatars in Hindu mythology. He becomes female, during the Samudra manthan, in the form of Mohini, to resolve a conflict between the Devas and Asuras. His male avatars include Matsya, Kurma, Varaha, Narasimha, Vamana, Parashurama, Rama, Krishna, Buddha, and Kalki.[160] Various texts, particularly the Bhagavad Gita, discuss the idea of Avatar of Vishnu appearing to restore the cosmic balance whenever the power of evil becomes excessive and causes persistent oppression in the world.[156]
In Shaktism traditions, the concept appears in its legends as the various manifestations of Devi, the Divine Mother principal in Hinduism.[161] The avatars of Devi or Parvati include Durga and Kali, who are particularly revered in eastern states of India, as well as Tantra traditions.[162][163][164] Twenty one avatars of Shiva are also described in Shaivism texts, but unlike Vaishnava traditions, Shaiva traditions have focussed directly on Shiva rather than the Avatar concept.[155]
Metaphysical Inspirations -- Intelligence and Happiness
By Deborah Young
www.experiencefestival.com/a/Metaphysical_Inspirations/id...
Intelligence does not in and of itself bring happiness. What brings happiness is acceptance. There is no purpose to intelligence, it is inherent within the energy of all that is. Intelligence and energy are one and the same. Energy is intelligence. Intelligence is energy.
People incarnate all have the same amount of intelligence at their total self level and within the molecular structure of their bodies. A physical form is constructed by the total self utilising energy, intelligence and intention. This physical form is given certain parameters in which to operate on the physical plane.
Many factors are utilised to create these parameters such as genetic code, environmental stimulus, and emotional motivational factors which would determine that point of consciousness' degree of interest in its environment, and electromagnetic chemical activity.
Not all individuals who express themselves as what is considered more intelligent are what is considered more highly evolved spiritually. It is a matter of chosen experience. Generally speaking, a point of consciousness or an incarnation that is becoming more aware of its totality or its inner light, may be considered, in societal terms, more intelligent.
That is because as a point of consciousness becomes more aware of itself in its true nature, it has access to more of the intelligence that it truly is. A point of consciousness or physical incarnation that is not aware of its true nature, its inner light, its total self, may seem to be less intelligent as a physical incarnate simply because that incarnation does not have access to its full range of intellectual potential.
This is particularly true if that incarnation has been restricted with other limitations such as genetic brain usage potential, environmental factors and emotional motivational factors.
When you perceive a person to be less intelligent, remind yourself that this is a point of consciousness that is simply experiencing less access to its total self, which is pure intelligence.
Happiness then, has nothing to do with intelligence when intelligence is used as a point of reference for self. In other words, if intelligence is something by which you value or measure your worth, this will not bring you happiness.
If intelligence is seen and utilised as a tool for asking greater and greater questions of the mind, then intelligence is a method through which you can offer your mind a koan. For example, a way to distract the ego mind with endless questions until at last the mind becomes overwhelmed and silent and the awareness of the total self has a bridge through the amnesia to the point of consciousness. The point of consciousness would then seem to have an awareness, a mystical experience, an awakening, or a moment of clarity.
Happiness is a result of acceptance. Those who operate with greater mental constraints, for whatever reason, sometimes seem to have an easier time accepting their circumstances, their environment, and themselves, because they are not given to long- winded inner dialoguing and mental journeys into the various nuances of their perceived reality. And so a so called simple minded person can shrug their shoulders and carry on, accept what is, and that is what creates the avenue for the experience of happiness.
An incarnate with less mental restrictions, having access to greater levels of intelligence, may spend so much time analysing, dialoging, cataloging, and in general thinking about its environment and the different potentials, that it has difficulty simply accepting the perceived reality. It therefore does not have an avenue through which to experience happiness. Happiness is a function of acceptance. This does not mean that if you accept a negative situation that you will be happy with that negative situation. However, when you accept a negative situation you then allow yourself the choice and the freedom to choose to experience an alternate reality.
Without acceptance, points of consciousness or physical incarnations, have a tendency to be in denial. If you are not accepting it, you are denying it. If you are denying it, there is nothing you can do it. You are not in a place of power. You are not in a position to choose anything else. When you come to a point of acceptance, that does not mean "I like this," it means "I accept that this is a negative situation and I choose love instead of this," or "I choose another reality," or "I choose to create, what for me, would be a more positive or pleasant experience," or "I choose to declare that this negative experience is not what I desire any longer." You could say "yes, I am having this negative experience, and yes I choose to change it now."
When this is done, the avenues through which the change can occur are perceived. Opportunities are presented and the necessary actions can be taken to affect the change.
Title: The Metaphysical Poets.
Author: Helen Gardner (Editor).
Publisher: Penguin Books.
Date: 1975.
Artist: Germano Facetti (John Souch).
The body of light, sometimes called the 'astral body'[a] or the 'subtle body,'[b] is a "quasi material"aspect of the human body, being neither solely physical nor solely spiritual, posited by a number of philosophers, and elaborated on according to various esoteric, occult, and mystical teachings. Other terms used for this body include body of glory, spirit-body, luciform body, augoeides ('radiant body'), astroeides ('starry or sidereal body'), and celestial body.The concept derives from the philosophy of Plato: the word 'astral' means 'of the stars'; thus the astral plane consists of the Seven Heavens of the classical planets. The idea is rooted in common worldwide religious accounts of the afterlife in which the soul's journey or "ascent" is described in such terms as "an ecstatic, mystical or out-of body experience, wherein the spiritual traveller leaves the physical body and travels in their body of light into 'higher' realms." Neoplatonists Porphyry and Proclus elaborated on Plato's description of the starry nature of the human psyche. Throughout the Renaissance, philosophers and alchemists, healers including Paracelsus and his students, and natural scientists such as John Dee, continued to discuss the nature of the astral world intermediate between earth and the divine. The concept of the astral body or body of light was adopted by 19th-century ceremonial magician Éliphas Lévi, Florence Farr and the magicians of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, including Aleister Crowley. Plato and Aristotle taught that the stars were composed of a type of matter different from the four earthly elements - a fifth, ethereal element or quintessence. In the astral mysticism of the classical world the human psyche was composed of the same material, thus accounting for the influence of the stars upon human affairs. In his commentaries on Plato's Timaeus, Proclus wrote; Man is a little world (mikros cosmos). For, just like the Whole, he possesses both mind and reason, both a divine and a mortal body. He is also divided up according to the universe. It is for this reason, you know, that some are accustomed to say that his consciousness corresponds with the nature of the fixed stars, his reason in its contemplative aspect with Saturn and in its social aspect with Jupiter, (and) as to his irrational part, the passionate nature with Mars, the eloquent with Mercury, the appetitive with Venus, the sensitive with the Sun and the vegetative with the Moon. Such doctrines were commonplace in mystery-schools, Gnostic and Hermetic sects throughout the Roman Empire, and influenced the early Christian church. Paul's Second Epistle to the Corinthians contains a reference to the astral plane or astral projection:"I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know—God knows." Neoplatonism is a branch of classical philosophy that uses the works of Plato as a guide to understanding religion and the world. In the Myth of Er, particularly, Plato rendered an account of the afterlife which involved a journey through seven planetary spheres and then eventual reincarnation. He taught that man was composed of mortal body, immortal reason and an intermediate 'spirit'.[10] Neoplatonists agreed as to the immortality of the rational soul but disagreed as to whether man's "irrational soul" was immortal and celestial ("starry", hence astral) or whether it remained on earth and dissolved after death. The early Neoplatonist Porphyry (3rd century) wrote of the Augoeides, a term which is encountered in the literature of Neoplatonic theurgy. The word originates from Ancient Greek and has been interpreted as deriving from 'αυγο', meaning 'egg', or 'αυγή', meaning 'dawn', combined with 'είδηση', indicative of 'news' or 'a message', or with 'εἴδωλον', an 'idol' or 'reflection'.[citation needed] Thomas Taylor commented on Porphyry's use of the term: For here he evidently conjoins the rational soul, or the etherial sense, with its splendid vehicle, or the fire of simple ether; since it is well known that this vehicle, according to Plato, is rendered by proper purgation 'augoeides', or luciform, and divine. Synesius, a 4th-century Greek bishop, according to Isaac Myer equated the divine body with 'Imagination' (phantasia) itself, considering it to be "something very subtle, yet material," referring to it as "the first body of the soul." Building on concepts described by Iamblichus and Plotinus, the late Neoplatonist Proclus (5th century), who is credited as the first to speak of subtle planes, posited two subtle bodies, vehicles, or 'carriers' (okhema), intermediate between spirit and the physical body. These were:
the augoeides okhêma, 'luminous vehicle' or 'body of light', which he identified as the immortal vehicle of the rational soul.
the pneumatikon okhêma, 'pneumatic vehicle' or 'body of breath', indwelling the vital breath (pneuma), which he identified as the mortal vehicle of the irrational soul. (cf. pneumatic). Renaissance medicine and magic.Renaissance magic was a resurgence in Hermeticism and Neo-Platonic varieties of the magical arts which arose along with Renaissance humanism in the 15th and 16th centuries CE. During the Renaissance period, magic and occult practices underwent significant changes that reflected shifts in cultural, intellectual, and religious perspectives. C. S. Lewis, in his work on English literature, highlighted the transformation in how magic was perceived and portrayed. In medieval stories, magic had a fantastical and fairy-like quality, while in the Renaissance, it became more complex and tied to the idea of hidden knowledge that could be explored through books and rituals. This change is evident in the works of authors like Spenser, Marlowe, Chapman, and Shakespeare, who treated magic as a serious and potentially dangerous pursuit.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_magic
Look at the universal world full of the light of the sun. Look at the light in the world’s matter full of all the universal forms and forever changing. Subtract, I beg you, matter from the light and put the rest aside : suddenly you have soul, that is, incorporeal light, replete with all the forms, but changeable.Ficino describes this tenuous form as being of aether or quintessence, the fifth element, spirit, and says that it has a "fiery and starry nature."[e] He also refers to it as the 'astral body,' intermediate between spirit and the body of matter. Such ideas greatly influenced the Renaissance medicine of Paracelsus (1493–1541) and Servetus (1509/11–1553).[20] John Dee (1527–1608/9), a student of Ficino, based his natural philosophy on Ficino and the Medieval optical theories of Roger Bacon, William of Ockham, John Peckham, and Vitello; according to Szulakowska "specifically for his ideas concerning the radiation of light rays and the effects of the planetary and stellar influences on the earth." Dee was also influenced by the Arabian philosopher Al-Kindi, whose treatise De radiis stellarum wove together astrology and optical theory, which inspired Dee's Propaedeumata Aphoristica. In Dee's system of Enochian magic, there were three main techniques: invocation (prayer), scrying (crystal-gazing), and traveling in the body of light. Isaac Newton's occult studies. Isaac Newton (1642–1726/27), despite his renown for his scientific pursuits, held an alchemist's perspective. In the early 18th century, he speculated that material bodies might be transformed into light, connecting this idea with the 'subtle body' of alchemy. Much of what are known as Isaac Newton's occult studies can largely be attributed to his study of alchemy. From a young age, Newton was deeply interested in all forms of natural sciences and materials science, an interest which would ultimately lead to some of his better-known contributions to science. His earliest encounters with certain alchemical theories and practices were during his childhood, when a twelve year old Isaac Newton was boarding in the attic of an apothecaries shop. During Newton's lifetime, the study of chemistry was still in its infancy, so many of his experimental studies used esoteric language and vague terminology more typically associated with alchemy and occultism.It was not until several decades after Newton's death that experiments of stoichiometry under the pioneering works of Antoine Lavoisier were conducted, and analytical chemistry, with its associated nomenclature, came to resemble modern chemistry as we know it today. However, Newton's contemporary and fellow Royal Society member, Robert Boyle, had already discovered the basic concepts of modern chemistry and began establishing modern norms of experimental practice and communication in chemistry, information which Newton did not use. Much of Newton's writing on alchemy may have been lost in a fire in his laboratory, so the true extent of his work in this area may have been larger than is currently known. Newton also suffered a nervous breakdown during his period of alchemical work. Newton's writings suggest that one of the main goals of his alchemy may have been the discovery of the philosopher's stone (a material believed to turn base metals into gold), and perhaps to a lesser extent, the discovery of the highly coveted Elixir of Life. The elixir of life (Medieval Latin: elixir vitae), also known as elixir of immortality, is a potion that supposedly grants the drinker eternal life and/or eternal youth. This elixir was also said to cure all diseases. Alchemists in various ages and cultures sought the means of formulating the elixir.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elixir_of_life
Newton reportedly believed that a Diana's Tree, an alchemical demonstration producing a dendritic "growth" of silver from solution, was evidence that metals "possessed a sort of life." Within the last few hundred years, some alchemists have adopted the Tree of Life from the Kabbalah. This knowledge is not used by all alchemists, which is fine, but a basic working knowledge of it can go very far for one's progress, of this I am certain. The Tree of Life serves as a sort of spiritual road map between the physical world and the Absolute, or God. There are different levels of consciousness, each associated with a particular rate of vibration (slower vibrations for lower levels, higher rates for higher levels, eventually reaching to infinity or the Absolute), a planet, and a metal. You can apply this to work both in spagyrics and mineral alchemy, as you can see for yourself just where on the Tree these particular plants or ores/substances are located. As another application, the Tree of Life can be stretched out into a line, levels 1 through 10, ten on the bottom, 1 at the top. Level 10, our physical reality, is the most mundane. Between it and the higher worlds is the first Veil, guarded by our own Guardian of the Threshold, our own morality. Based on the state or evolution of that morality, we can access higher worlds through mysticism (one avenue of which is alchemy). If our intent is noble, our Guardian will allow us access to the higher worlds, the level accessible based on our spiritual evolution. Levels 9 to 7 constitue the Lunar Astral world; Levels 6 to 4 constitute the Solar Astral world; and Levels 3 to 1 constitute the Buffer between the Created worlds and the Absolute.
ethekarius.wixsite.com/alchemy/treeoflife
Some practices of alchemy were banned in England during Newton's lifetime, due in part to unscrupulous practitioners who would often promise wealthy benefactors unrealistic results in an attempt to swindle them. The English Crown, also fearing the potential devaluation of gold because of the creation of fake gold, made penalties for alchemy very severe. In some cases the punishment for unsanctioned alchemy would include the public hanging of an offender on a gilded scaffold while adorned with tinsel and other items.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton%27s_occult_studies
Franz Anton Mesmer (1734–1815) borrowed from Newton's more occult theories with the intention of finding medical applications. He also built on the work of Richard Mead (1673–1754), who hypothesized that due to the astral nature of the human body, it is subject to an "all‐pervading gravitation emanating from the stars." Mesmer expanded this concept, hypothesizing that bodies were subject to a form of magnetism emanating from all other bodies, not just the stars, which he called 'animal magnetism,' describing it as a "fluid which is universally widespread and pervasive in a manner which allows for no void, subtly permits no comparison, and is of a nature which is susceptible to receive, propagate, and communicate all impressions of movement."[f] Mesmer's theories influenced the Spiritualist traditions. Helena Blavatsky (1831–1891) wrote of the Augoeides, though her own theories of the astral body were derived from the subtle body traditions of Eastern mysticism. The most substantial difference consisted in the location of the immortal or divine spirit of man. While the ancient Neoplatonists held that the Augoeides never descends hypostatically into the living man, but only more or less sheds its radiance on the inner man – the astral soul – the Kabalists of the Middle Ages maintained that the spirit, detaching itself from the ocean of light and spirit, entered into man's soul, where it remained through life imprisoned in the astral capsule.
Ceremonial magic Éliphas Lévi. In the mid-nineteenth century the French occultist Éliphas Lévi (1810–1875) introduced the term 'astral light' in his Dogme et rituel de la haute magie (1856), and wrote of it as a factor he considered of key importance to magic, alongside the power of will and the doctrine of correspondences. Lévi developed a full theory of the 'sidereal body' which for the most part agrees with the Neoplatonic tradition of Proclus, Iamblichus, Plotinus, and Porphyry, though he credited Paracelsus as his source. He considered the astral light to be the medium of all light, energy, and movement, describing it in terms that recall both Mesmer and the luminiferous aether. Lévi's idea of the astral was to have much influence in the English-speaking world due to being adopted by the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn and by Aleister Crowley, who believed himself to be Lévi's reincarnation and promoted a number of ideas from his works, including his idea of the true self or True Will, much of his system of ceremonial magic, and his theories of the astral plane and the body of light.
Florence Farr and the Golden Dawn. The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, a secret magical order originating in 1888 in Victorian England, describes the subtle body as "the Sphere of Sensation." Florence Farr (1860–1917) developed the Golden Dawn education system, succeeded William Wynn Westcott as "Chief Adept in Anglia," and wrote several of the Order's secret instruction papers, called the "Flying Rolls." Her magical motto was Sapientia Sapienti Dona Data (Latin: 'Wisdom is a gift given to the wise'). Farr's writings, signed with the initials of her motto 'SSDD', studied the ten parts of a human being which she said were described in ancient Egyptian writings, including the Sahu, the elemental or astral body; the Tet or Zet, the spiritual body or soul; and the Khaibt, the sphere or aura, radiating from the Sahu, and symbolised by a fan. Farr wrote that the ancient Egyptian adepts "looked upon each body, or manifested being, as the material basis of a long vista of immaterial entities functioning as a spirit, soul and mind in the formative, creative and archetypal worlds." She described how the Khaibt forms a sphere around a human being at birth.The occultist Israel Regardie (1907–1985) published a collection of Golden Dawn magical texts which state that "the whole sphere of sensation which surroundeth the whole physical body of a man is called 'the magical mirror of the universe'. For therein are represented all the occult forces of the universe projected as on a sphere..." Regardie connects the Sephiroth of the Qabalistic Tree of Life to this sphere as a microcosm of the universe. The Kabbalistic concept of the Nephesch ('psyche') is seen as "the subtle body of refined Astral Light upon which, as on an invisible pattern, the physical body is extended." The tree of life is mentioned in the Book of Genesis; it is distinct from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. After Adam and Eve disobeyed God by eating fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they were driven out of the Garden of Eden. Remaining in the garden, however, was the tree of life. To prevent their access to this tree in the future, Cherubim with a flaming sword were placed at the east of the garden. In the Book of Proverbs, the tree of life is associated with wisdom: "[Wisdom] is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her, and happy [is every one] that retaineth her."In Proverbs 15:4, the tree of life is associated with calmness: "A soothing tongue is a tree of life; but perverseness therein is a wound to the spirit. Jewish mysticism depicts the tree of life in the form of ten interconnected nodes, as the central symbol of the Kabbalah. It comprises the ten Sefirot powers in the divine realm. The panentheistic and anthropomorphic emphasis of this emanationist theology interpreted the Torah, Jewish observance, and the purpose of Creation as the symbolic esoteric drama of unification in the sefirot, restoring harmony to Creation. From the Renaissance onwards, Kabbalah became incorporated as tradition in Christian Western esotericism as Hermetic Qabalah.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_life
The occultist Aleister Crowley (1875–1947), the founder of the new religious movement Thelema, translated augoeides literally as 'egg message' and connected it with 'the Knowledge & Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel' or 'higher & original (egg) genius' associated with each human being. He stressed that the body of light must be built up though the use of imagination, and that it must then be animated, exercised, and disciplined. According to Asprem (2017): The practice of creating a "body of light” in imagination builds on the body-image system, potentially working with alterations across all of its three modalities (perceptual, conceptual, and affective): an idealized body is produced (body-image model), new conceptual structures are attached to it (e.g., the doctrine of multiple, separable bodies), while emotional attachments of awe, dignity, and fear responses are cultivated through the performance of astral rituals and protections from "astral dangers" through the simulation of symbols and magical weapons. Crowley explains that the most important practices for developing the Body of Light are: The fortification of the Body of Light by the constant use of rituals, by the assumption of god-forms, and by the right use of the Eucharist. The purification and consecration and exaltation of that Body by the use of rituals of invocation.
The education of that Body by experience. It must learn to travel on every plane; to break down every obstacle which may confront it. According to Crowley, the role of the body of light is broader than simply being a vehicle for astral travel — he writes that it is also the storehouse of all experience.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_of_light
Enlightenment or God-realization is the highest aspect of our human potential for growth in body, mind, and spirit. According to many esoteric traditions, as we awaken to our oneness with God, bodily changes occur, most dramatically in the higher phases of enlightenment. In the final phase, the body is alchemically changed from flesh into light, becoming immortal. Enlightenment becomes a literal fact through the transubstantiation of flesh and blood into an immortal body of light. Various traditions have different names for this transubstantiated form, including the light body, the resurrection body, the solar body, and the diamond body. In this article, we will look at this phenomenon from a cross-cultural and evolutionary perspective. We will also consider questions such as; what is the relationship between death and resurrection? What is meant by the terms "ascended masters" and "illuminati"? We will look at Christianity as a Western enlightenment tradition whose purpose is to enable people to develop psychophysically through resurrection to become Christed god-men and god-women. Toward the end, we will look the Shroud of Turin as evidence of bodily transubstantiation and the perfection of the human race. From Transfiguration to Transubstantiation. The model of human consciousness I will be using is essentially drawn from the ancient yogic chakra model of consciousness, which posits seven stages of development that correspond to each of the chakras. Enlightenment is the highest. The American spiritual teacher Sapta Na Adi Da Samraj (formerly known as Adi Da and Da Free John, among other names; born Franklin A. Jones) divides this phase into three substages: transfiguration, transformation, and translation. With transfiguration, the body-mind is pervaded by what he calls Divine Radiance as the person abides in God-realization. Transformation is characterized by the manifestation of extraordinary powers and faculties (sometimes called siddhis), such as psychic healing capacities, genius, and longevity, as spontaneous expressions of further permeation of the body-mind by Divine Radiance. Translation removes the individual from space-time altogether and returns him to what I call the Preluminous Void, the unmanifest state of existence before God said "Let there be light." I believe this model, though valuable, is incomplete. Therefore I would like to suggest adding a next-to-last stage before translation: transubstantiation, or attaining the light body. This is the culmination of the entire evolutionary process of higher human development. It results in a deathless body of light, the perfection of the human body-mind, and it is the subject of this article. The True Nature of Resurrection...Sacred traditions and metaphysical schools of thought generally agree that reality is multileveled and that each level of reality is composed of different energies or of matter with different degrees of vibration and density. In their totality, these energies and forms of matter constitute a spectrum of substance. At one end of the spectrum is purely physical matter; at the other end is pure spirit prior to its manifestation as matter and energy. This spectrum of substance is one of the two primal forms of God constituting the cosmos. The other is the spectrum of consciousness. Together, they are the inner and outer aspects of reality, the subjective and objective, the intention and extension of God. Through our body-mind, we humans partake of all levels of reality, although we are generally unaware of the higher ones. Nonetheless, we retain the potential to awaken to the full spectrum of our being as consciousness and substance. Furthermore, we have a form or container or vehicle for our consciousness on each of those levels—a vehicle that is composed from the substance of that level. Collectively these are called energy bodies. They can be seen as nested one within the other, and all are resident within the physical body, although their energies may extend beyond it. Our physical body of flesh, blood, and bone is merely the container through which we function at the level of reality we know as ordinary space-time. At death, as the physical body decomposes, the other bodies withdraw from it, and the consciousness continues to function in other levels of reality. Those energy bodies have been given various names by various traditions. In one tradition they are termed the gross, the subtle, and the causal levels and bodies. In another they are the physical, the vital, the emotional, the mental, and the spiritual levels and bodies. In yet another they are termed koshas or "sheaths" of finer and finer substance enfolding the physical body. Still more names could be given from still other metaphysical systems. Here are some of the names given to the "highest" or "final" energy body in various traditions: In the Christian tradition it is called "the resurrection body" or "the glorified body." St. Paul called it "the celestial body" or "spiritual body." In Sufism it is called "the most sacred body" (wujud al-aqdas). In Taoism it is called "the diamond body," and those who have attained it are called "the immortals" and "the cloudwalkers." In Tibetan Buddhism it is called "the light body."
In some mystery schools it is called "the solar body."
In Rosicrucianism it is called "the diamond body of the temple of God." In Tantrism and yoga it is called the "the vajra body," "the adamantine body" and "the divine body."
In Vedanta it is called "the superconductive body."
In Kriya yoga it is called "the body of bliss." In Gnosticism and Neoplatonism it is called "the radiant body." In the alchemical tradition, it is called "the glory of the whole universe" or the "golden body." In the Hermetic Corpus it is called "the immortal body" (soma athanaton). In ancient Egypt it was called the akh.
In Old Persia it was called "the indwelling divine potential" (fravashi or fravarti). In the Mithraic liturgy it was called "the perfect body" (soma teleion). In the philosophy of Sri Aurobindo it is called "the Divine Body," composed of supramental substance. As I see it, these are different terms for the same ultimate stage of human development. If I understand these terms correctly, they refer to the condition in which a human being, by a combination of personal effort and divine grace, attains a deathless state through the transubstantiation or alchemical transmutation of his or her ordinary fleshly body. The traditions speak of the process in different ways. Is the immortal body created or released, attained or manifested? Is it preexistent within the individual, so that the gross matter of the body and the other energy bodies are simply "burned" away? Or is the gross matter of the body altered through a process not yet recognized by physical science that changes the atoms of flesh into something unnamed on the periodic table of elements? Is there more than one route to the perfected human body-mind?
These are provocative questions, but I have no definitive answers to offer here. I am seeking answers, and I welcome whatever information readers may have to share. Attaining Immortality. Whatever the process may be, it enables the transubstantiated individual to operate within ordinary space-time through an immortal vehicle of consciousness. Unlike biological flesh, that deathless body is no longer carbon-based. Rather it is composed of a finer, more ethereal form of energy substance unknown to conventional physics but long known to metaphysics. For a human individual, this condition is the most exalted phase of higher human development. The person has become fully manifested as what he or she inherently is: a form of God. Such people have been recognized throughout history as "god-men" and "god-women." If we share a common human nature, then what is possible for one is possible for all, at least theoretically. For humanity in a collective sense, then, the body of light is the final stage of evolution, the perfection of man, the complete manifestation of the Mystical Body of Christ. Attaining the body of light is an alternative to death or, more correctly, the conquest of death. As Dr. Charles Musas put it in an article in Astrologia (vol. 1, no. 2, 1974), which I quoted in my book Kundalini, Evolution, and Enlightenment: The most ancient Egyptian teachings were concerned with an occult science—now lost and as yet far beyond the reach of our technology—whereby while still in this life, the carbon-based body, by suitable extradimensional radiation, could be transformed into the new type of energy-substance and form the imperishable, radiant body. In this manner, the initiate so treated could enter into a higher dimensional objective world...without the trauma of physical death. Jesus and the Body of Light. The best-known example of transubstantiation of the human body-mind is Jesus of Nazareth. I regard Christianity as an enlightenment tradition whose true purpose is to enable people to become Christed. That is, Christianity has (or had) both a theory and a practice for attaining enlightenment in the highest degree. But that understanding has been lost in the institutional forms and sects that have arisen over doctrinal and ritualistic differences that are not essential to the process of growth to Christhood. It is important for fundamentalists to realize this fact, but it is also important for transpersonalists, integralists, and secular spiritualists who dismiss certain inner truths about Christianity and thereby overlook the possibility of connecting with a Western enlightenment tradition whose roots extend at least to ancient Egypt. Fundamentalist Christians often speak about the blood sacrifice of Jesus. They declare that his shedding of blood was a mighty act of salvation. A hymn asks, "Are you washed in the blood of the Lamb?" It asks whether the listener is cleansed from sin and redeemed from eternal damnation by accepting the blood sacrifice of Jesus as the sign of his rulership of creation.
With all due respect, that view of Jesus and Christianity is naive, literalistic, and superficial. It is an exoteric understanding of a situation that actually requires an esoteric understanding. In other words, conventional Christianity has the teaching, but not the key that unlocks its meaning. I will explain. Contrary to what many Christian fundamentalists believe, I would like to suggest that the resurrection of Jesus did not involve reconstitution of his flesh, blood, and bone into a functioning biological organism. It was not the restoration of his physical body or the reanimation of a decomposing corpse. Similar examples of this fallacious fundamentalism may be seen in ancient China and in Orthodox Judaism. In ancient China, I have read, it was common for men to save their cut hair and fingernails on a lifelong basis so that upon the person's death they could be placed in the grave or tomb in order to be ready for use in restoring that person's body to life. Likewise, in Orthodox Judaism it is believed that the Messiah will resurrect dead bodies upon his coming, so Orthodox Jews retain even amputated body parts for burial with the person. No matter what form this literalism takes, it needs to be corrected with insight and understanding. There is no need to collect body parts. Doing that is an entirely superfluous and literal-minded view that misdirects one's energy and consciousness. Nor is there any need to be "washed in the blood of the Lamb." The important thing is, as the Bhagavad Gita puts it, to "fix your heart on God" and then invoke the Holy Spirit, the Shekhinah, the goddess Kundalini, or whatever devotional form your particular tradition may provide. Support that with moral behavior, contemplative practice, cultivation of the mind, works of social goodness and civic responsibility. In other words, live a life of integral practice so that your entire being—body, mind and spirit—is oriented to the attainment of enlightenment. God will take care of the rest. However, "the rest," according to esoteric traditions, includes advanced practices that are for all intents and purposes unknown to the exoteric forms of those traditions—the churches, temples, mosques, etc., where conventional worship prevails and enlightenment-knowledge is generally regarded as craziness or heresy. It is not a matter of having all your body parts collected; dead flesh is dead flesh. It is a matter of enlivening your energy bodies so that, through spiritual refinement, the dross is removed and the "highest" body is developed to the point of complete self-mastery. Then you can cast off the flesh body through the death process, but without the trauma of dying. You release the light body from its fleshly cocoon. You put on the "robe of light." You no longer cast a shadow because you no longer have a shadow. Evidence of the Shroud. When Jesus arose from the dead, he lived in a resurrection or glorified body. That is indicated by the Shroud of Turin, which, legend maintains, was the funeral shroud of Jesus when he was buried in the tomb after crucifixion. Although a carbon-14 test in the 1980s purportedly showed that the Shroud was no older than the fourteenth century—and therefore was a hoax—it has now been shown that the results of this test were badly flawed by two major factors. First, the sample of the fabric tested was recently found to be part of a sixteenth-century patch or invisible repair of the original cloth, which had been damaged. (The repair was revealed by microscopic examination.) Second, microscopic biological material (mold microorganisms) was present on the piece of fabric tested. These factors led to a medieval date for the Shroud. New tests move the relic's age back to the first century. Moreover, other research has identified pollen grains on the Shroud that could only have come from the vicinity of Jerusalem during the months of March and April, when such localized vegetation is in bloom. Finally, the weave of the cloth has now been identified as specific to Palestine in the first century and not to medieval Europe. For these and other reasons, the Shroud is now clearly established as an authentic first-century relic. As for the image of the man in the Shroud, research likewise indicates that it is no hoax. The blood stains are real (type AB) and contain human male DNA. Shroud researcher Frank Tribbe notes in his book Portrait of Jesus? that the closest science can come to explaining how the image of the man was imprinted on the Shroud is by comparing the situation to a controlled burst of high-intensity radiation similar to the Hiroshima bomb explosion, which "printed" images of disintegrated people on building walls. Shroud researcher Ray Rogers, a physical chemist from Los Alamos Laboratory, said, "I am forced to conclude that the image was formed by a burst of radiant energy—light if you like." In other words, the image is recorded on the cloth as if by a photoflash of brilliant light rising from the body of the man in the Shroud. Another Shroud researcher, Alan Adler of Western Connecticut State College, concluded that the image could have been created only by a form of energy that science cannot name. Apparently a self-induced nuclear "explosion" was the means by which Jesus transubstantiated. This line of reasoning means that Jesus actually died, physically and biologically. While he may have been alive in a yogic swoon or a near-death condition when placed in the tomb, nevertheless at some point he underwent biological death in order to attain resurrection. But unlike the typical corpse, which undergoes decomposition into its elements, Jesus's physical body was altered into something more elemental—indeed, more fundamental, although it is not understood by fundamentalists. From my point of view, Jesus called people to duplicate himself, to grow into "the stature and fullness of Christ," so that in our own bodies—our own flesh and blood—we perform the true and complete imitation of Christ. Institutional Christianity, from evangelical to mainstream churches, aims at producing Christians when it should aim at producing Christs. The kingdom of heaven to which Jesus called humanity is not an astrophysical location but a state of consciousness known as enlightenment. Jesus' life, death, and postmortem acts opened "the gates of heaven" for everyone, but mere belief in Jesus is not enough. No one will pass through the gates unless he or she lives a God-centered life resulting in God-realization. And in the final phase of God-realization, one literally becomes light. Ascended Masters and the Illuminati. There may have been others before (and after) Jesus who attained the glorified body or resurrection body, as is implied in various ways in both biblical and extrabiblical literature. The pharaonic ceremonial tradition of ancient Egypt is primarily about the process of consciousness transference from the flesh body to the spirit body or akh. Knowledge of that process may have passed into Judaism through Moses, who, according to the Bible, became a member of the pharaoh's household when he was rescued as a baby by a pharaoh's daughter. From Moses, according to esoteric legends, the akh knowledge descended through the centuries as an underground stream in some branches or schools of Judaism, emerging publicly and most dramatically through the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. Legends and some esoteric documents also have the tradition continuing through some of the early Christians to the Cathars of southern France, and thence to the Knights Templar and modern Freemasonry as expounded by scholars such as Manly P. Hall and W. L. Wilmshurst. Although Jesus is the primary Western exemplar of resurrection, there are others, both Eastern and Western, whom history and legend record as similarly transubstantiated. According to various esoteric traditions, a number of "ascended masters" have attained to that condition and are accessible to us when they choose to be. Among them are Melchizedek, Ezekiel, Count St. Germain, Boganathar, Kriya Babaji Nagaraj (also known as Mahavatar Babaji and Shiva Baba), Koot Hoomi, Morya, Djual Kool, Matsyendra Nathan, and Swami Ramalingam. Collectively, they are known as the White Brotherhood, the illumined ones or the true illuminati. In a different but related situation—that of near-death research—are reports by the thousands of people who, while clinically dead, have found themselves in a nonterrestrial environment and have then become aware of the presence of a being of light. These light beings have been identified by the near-death experiencers as gods, angels, devas, saints, holy people, mythological personalities, and other figures associated with divinity. The reports imply a veritable society of such entities, operating in what seem to be vehicles of consciousness identical to the one Jesus had after his resurrection. That society resides at the top of the divine hierarchy of worlds extending from the lowest physical level to the highest of the metaphysical. The hierarchy has often been called the Great Chain of Being; it connects all life to God, from the lowest microorganisms, through humanity, to the forms native to the higher worlds, such as angels, devas, and archangels. At the highest level, the Logos—where creation itself begins—are those Christed ones of humanity who have ascended to the throne of God, that is, who have attained the condition of existence that is the seat of power for God's governing of the cosmos. Despite the apparently vast distance which separates them from us, they are simply "elder brothers and sisters" of ours who have traveled the evolutionary path before us. They present themselves to us in ways that appeal to our deepest nature and that urge us to externalize that nature in every aspect of our own being, including relationships and social organization. They are models for human aspirations of spiritual growth. Thus Jesus, properly understood, is not a vehicle of salvation, as fundamentalists claim, but a model of perfection drawing us beyond ego to the transpersonal and the mystical.
From my perspective, someday in a distant evolutionary future we humans will wear the seamless robe of light. May all beings attain enlightenment!.
www.theosophical.org/publications/quest-magazine/resurrec...
Turiec Gallery in Martin, Slovakia
for educational purpose only
please do not use without permission
Graham Harman, founder of Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO) and Professor of Philosophy and Associate Provost for Research Administration at the American University
The MA in Critical Theory and Creative Research at the Pacific Northwest College of Art and the Ford Institute for Visual Education
is pleased to announce a lecture by
GRAHAM HARMAN
“Greenberg, Heidegger, McLuhan, and the Arts”
PNCA Main Building, Swigert Commons
Tuesday, January 22, 2013
6:30 p.m.- 8:00 p.m.
About Graham Harman
Graham Harman is the founder of Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO) and the author of numerous books, including Tool-Being: Heidegger and the Metaphysics of Objects, Guerrilla Metaphysics: Phenomenology and the Carpentry of Things, Circus Philosophicus, The Quadruple Object, and, most recently, Quentin Meillassoux: Philosophy in the Making and Weird Realism: Lovecraft and Philosophy. He lives in Cairo, Egypt, where he is Professor of Philosophy and Associate Provost for Research Administration at the American University.
About the MA in Critical Theory and Creative Research
PNCA’s Master of Arts in Critical Theory and Creative Research (CT+CR) is an accelerated (45-credit), seminar-based program that prepares students for opportunities at the intersection of art, theory, and research. The program combines socio-political critique with process-driven inquiry, pushing both theory and research in new directions within the context of a 21st-century art school.
Photographer: Marshall Astor '13.
La chiesa dei Gesuiti a Venezia, composizione di luci, ombre, colori, linee e forme -
Gesuiti's Church in Venice,
composition of lights, shadows, colours, lines and shapes
ncient Egypt, Antico Egitto, Antique
Sculpture Sketch, Sketches, Schizzo, Scultura, Schizzi, Disegno, Figure, Figura
Figure Sketching, Anatomy Sketching, Anatomia
Triangulism Art, Triangolismo - Arte Metafisica, Metaphysics, Enigma, Minimalism, Individualism, Humanism, Expressionism
Leon XLVII Artwork to Sell by Artist,
Buy Original & Print Drawing / Painting / Sketch,
Lion, Leone