Comments on: Aspaqlaria http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2004/11/aspaqlaria.shtml Keeping values and meaning in focus. Mon, 06 Feb 2012 18:16:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Anonymous http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2004/11/aspaqlaria.shtml/comment-page-1#comment-2 Anonymous Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.aishdas.org/asp2/?p=4#comment-2 The metaphor of a mirror need not contradict the metaphor of a lens. Both could be filters through which Man must view the higher realms. As in, the lens refracts the light, but the mirror reflects the light - in either case we cannot see the Light directly, only through veils. So it need not be a "self-view". In fact, that position seems almost dangerous - how can the prophet know that the revelation is Divine, rather than what he/she wants to see/know? Prophecy by its nature is supposed to be a communication from Outside, something that crosses the line between Man and God. I suppose, contradicting myself, then, it could be both, if you take the Chabad-panentheist view - prophecy is via that which is BOTH a lens and a mirror, breaching the apparent immanence/transcendence divide. thanbo The metaphor of a mirror need not contradict the metaphor of a lens. Both could be filters through which Man must view the higher realms. As in, the lens refracts the light, but the mirror reflects the light – in either case we cannot see the Light directly, only through veils. So it need not be a “self-view”.

In fact, that position seems almost dangerous – how can the prophet know that the revelation is Divine, rather than what he/she wants to see/know? Prophecy by its nature is supposed to be a communication from Outside, something that crosses the line between Man and God.

I suppose, contradicting myself, then, it could be both, if you take the Chabad-panentheist view – prophecy is via that which is BOTH a lens and a mirror, breaching the apparent immanence/transcendence divide.

thanbo

]]>