Soul4you \u00b7 Georgina Kovacs \u00b7 Article 5 in the \u201eOne Dream\u201d series \u2013 reading time: approx. 10 minutes<\/p>\n
Introduction \u2014 after the tower comes the tree<\/p>\n
In the previous article, we left off with Babel: humankind was united by a single language, pursuing a single goal, when something intervened. The language was scattered, its construction was cut short, and what had begun there did not come to an end \u2014 it simply moved on to the next phase.<\/p>\n
The man standing by the tower still wanted to build something. The man standing in front of the tree no longer wants to build. He wants to know what is right and what is wrong. He wants to decide for himself, using his own standards.<\/p>\n
This article is about what happens at the moment when the sleeping mind does not reach upwards, but instead enters the realm of discrimination. And why does Genesis refer to this as death, even though a person does not physically die afterwards?<\/p>\n
I. The Hebrew text: etz hadaat tov vara<\/em><\/p>\n Genesis speaks of two trees in the middle of the garden. According to the St Stephen\u2019s Society Bible (hereinafter referred to as SZIT):<\/p>\n \u201eAnd the Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground\u2014trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food; and in the middle of the garden he placed the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.\u201d (Genesis 2:9 \u2014 szentiras.eu)<\/p>\n The Hebrew phrase behind the \u201etree of the knowledge of good and evil\u201d is: etz hadaat tov vara. There are four words worth looking at.<\/em><\/p>\n Etz (tree) \u2014 Strong\u2019s H6086. Basic meaning: tree, living tree, object made of wood, beam. In Hebrew thought, a tree is not merely a plant. It is a symbol of life, the axis, that which connects the earth to the heavens. There are two trees in the centre of the garden, and the two are not opposites. The tree of life and the tree of knowledge stand in the very same centre. It is as though they mark two different points of access to a single reality.<\/p>\n Da\u2019at (knowledge, understanding) \u2014 Strong\u2019s H1847. The Bible uses the word da\u2019at in an extremely profound sense. It does not mean information. Nor does it mean data. It refers to experiential, intimate understanding. It shares the same root as the verb yada, which the Bible also uses to describe the union between husband and wife (\u201eAdam knew his wife\u201d). Thus, daat is a kind of knowledge that takes up residence within the one who knows. It does not observe from the outside, but becomes one with it.<\/em><\/p>\n Tov (good) \u2014 Strong\u2019s H2896. This word recurs six times in the creation narrative: \u201eAnd God saw that it was good.\u201d Here, \u2018tov\u2019 is not a moral judgement. Rather, it means: it is as it should be, it works, it fits in its place, it is blessed. The \u2018good\u2019 that corresponds to its source.<\/em><\/p>\n Ra (bad) \u2014 Strong\u2019s H7451. This word has an extremely broad range of meanings: it can mean harmful, unpleasant, agonising, inappropriate, damaging, a calamity, or trouble. \u2018Ra\u2019 does not necessarily denote a moral transgression. Rather, it refers to that which does not belong where it ought to be. That which causes pain. That which falls apart.<\/em><\/p>\n If we consider the four words together, the \u201etree of the knowledge of good and evil\u201d refers to a very peculiar tree. A tree which, upon coming into contact with it, grants a person an intimate, all-encompassing experience of what belongs in its Rightful Place and what does not.<\/p>\n This is a set of scales. An internal tool that can now be used to cut everything in half.<\/p>\n And here\u2019s the twist: the problem isn\u2019t caused by knowledge. The problem is caused by a dormant consciousness taking control of the balance.<\/p>\n II. The movement of knowledge in the sleeping mind<\/p>\n In previous articles, we have seen that humankind, along with Adam, fell into a deep sleep, and in this dream hears voices: the voice of the serpent, its own voice, and, very occasionally, even the voice of the Spirit. The dreamer is unaware that he is dreaming. For him, the experience is real.<\/p>\n Genesis describes what happens at the tree as follows:<\/p>\n \u201eThe Lord God gave this command to the man: \u00bbYou may eat from any tree in the garden. But you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for on the day you eat from it, you will die.\u00ab\u201d (Gen 2:16\u201317 \u2014 SZIT)<\/p>\n It is worth pausing here for a moment. Because if we read Genesis at face value, this sentence is puzzling. Man eats from the tree, yet he does not die that very day; in fact, he goes on to live a long life. So what is the text actually talking about?<\/p>\n Not physical death. A deeper slumber. In Hebrew thought, the tree is an axis: it connects the earth with the heavens, and can be traversed in both directions. Upwards, enlightenment: the tree offers da\u2019at at the top, an encounter with the Source. Downwards, slumber: the same tree, the same fruit, but the knowledge carried into the depths of the slumbering consciousness will no longer be an encounter, but a reckoning. The difference lies not in the tree, but in the way one relates to it. As we saw in Article 1, the first movement of separation was sleep itself. Eating from the tree is a second movement in the same direction \u2014 one that takes us even deeper. In the sleeping consciousness, a faint memory of the Source still lingered: the remnant of the \u201eimage of God\u201d. Eating does not erase this memory, but merely dims it, and in the sleeping consciousness the da\u2019at movement becomes distorted into judgemental deliberation. This is death: not a falling away from Oneness (that occurred with sleep), but the activation of judgemental deliberation in the sleeping consciousness.<\/em><\/p>\n And this is when the serpent speaks. In the subconscious there is a faint sense that \u201esomething is missing that was once there\u201d. The serpent plays precisely on this feeling. Thus he says to Eve: \u201eBy no means; you will not die. God knows full well that on the day you eat of it, your eyes will be opened, and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil.\u201d (Gen 3:4\u20135 \u2014 SZIT)<\/p>\n The serpent confirms that this is not a matter of physical death. Up to this point, it is still telling the truth. Then comes the deception: a promise of a return home, which we have already examined in detail in Article 1: \u201ereturn to what you are \u2014 gods\u201d. In substance, it is almost true; it is only the manner that is distorted: the serpent appropriates the action, claiming as its own that which would only come to pass through cooperation with the Source. Here, in Article 5, the crux of the matter is what happens after the serpent\u2019s words \u2014 when man actually reaches out towards the tree.<\/p>\n Eve saw that \u201ethe tree was desirable to look at, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that it was desirable for gaining knowledge.\u201d (Gen 3:6 \u2014 SZIT) She took some of its fruit, ate it, and gave some to her husband as well. \u201eThen their eyes were opened.\u201d<\/p>\n They have seen before. Now something else is revealed. It is not a new way of seeing that begins, but the ability to distinguish. The mode of division kicks in. What was previously one thing is now split into two parts. They first notice this in their own bodies: \u201eThey realised they were naked.\u201d The body, which until now had simply been as it was, suddenly splits into two categories: right and wrong, acceptable and shameful.<\/p>\n Shame does not arise because the body has become \u201ebad\u201d, but because it differs from what one still remembered. The memory of Oneness, which has not been erased from the sleeping consciousness but has merely faded \u2014 this is the point of reference. In Oneness, one experienced oneself as boundless, as one with the Source, as radiance and innocence. When the mode of duality kicked in, they first looked at themselves, and what they saw did not match what they still knew, somewhere deep down, about themselves.<\/p>\n III. What\u2019s wrong with knowledge?<\/p>\n Here\u2019s the crux of the matter. It\u2019s not knowledge that\u2019s the problem. Knowledge is, in fact, the ultimate goal. The problem lies in the way we acquire knowledge.<\/p>\n The Teaching of Miracles distinguishes between perception and knowledge. This is described very precisely in Parts III and IV of Chapter 3 of the Main Text. To summarise the content: perception is always a relationship between two things. There is always one who looks and one who is looked at. Two parties: subject and object. Knowledge, by contrast, is not such a relationship. Knowledge is certainty, and within that certainty, the knower and the known do not stand opposed to one another \u2014 there is a single reality.<\/p>\n What it actually says is this: true knowledge does not divide reality in two. It becomes one with it. This is also what the Hebrew word \u2018da\u2019at\u2019 means.<\/em><\/p>\n The serpent\u2019s offer, however, does not offer this kind of knowledge. The serpent offers knowledge that passes judgement. The kind where the knower stands above what is known and divides it into two: this is good, this is bad; this is acceptable, this is shameful.<\/p>\n This is not knowledge in the sense in which the Teaching uses the term. It is perception, and indeed, judgemental perception. The difference between the two is not one of degree. They are two different modes of operation.<\/p>\n The tree of knowledge of good and evil is therefore not, in itself, the tree of judgement. The tree of da\u2019at is the very same tree up which the path leads. But in a sleeping consciousness, the da\u2019at movement is distorted into a judgemental movement. And from the moment the sleeping person partakes of it, they no longer see: they judge. They do not perceive: they categorise. They do not recognise: they divide.<\/em><\/p>\n In the SZIT, the expulsion is a reflection of this: \u201eSo the Lord God sent him out from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken.\u201d (Gen 3:23 \u2014SZIT) This is not a punishment. It is a consequence. Whoever enters into the workings of duality is, in their experience, severed from that which is one. It is not God who casts man out. Rather, the dualistic consciousness cannot coexist within Oneness. It adapts space to itself.<\/p>\n IV. Gu\u00e9non \u2014 the dominion of quantity<\/p>\n Ren\u00e9 Gu\u00e9non describes this shift using different terminology, but in exactly the same way. In his work *The Reign of Quantity*, he discusses how, in the modern age, humankind has lost its sense of quality and reduces all its experiences to quantity: to what can be counted, measured or weighed. Quality can only be known through participation \u2014 in a \u2018daat\u2019 manner. Quantity divides, measures and ranks. The modern world has absolutised one mode of operation: that of the weigher. And it has forgotten that there is another path: the tree of life.<\/em><\/p>\n V. The Counterpoint \u2014 Christ\u2019s Words on Life<\/p>\n In contrast to the Tree of Knowledge, the New Testament speaks of the \u201ebread of life\u201d and the \u201ewater of life\u201d. In the Gospel of John, Christ says:<\/p>\n \u201eI am the bread of life: whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.\u201d (John 6:35 \u2014 The Bible, 2002, J\u00e1nos K\u00e1lvin Publishing House, Budapest)<\/p>\n \u201eI am the way, the truth and the life.\u201d (John 14:6 \u2014 The Bible, 2002, J\u00e1nos K\u00e1lvin Publishing House, Budapest)<\/p>\n This is not a new teaching to replace the Tree of Knowledge. It is a return to the Tree of Life. To the way of da\u2019at. Where we do not judge, but partake. We do not measure, but become one.<\/em><\/p>\n The Teaching of Miracles conveys the same message in substance (Main Text, Chapter 7, Part VIII): knowledge is the state of Peace, where the knower and the known are one. As long as a person believes that they are separate from what they know, they remain at the level of perception. In knowledge, there is no longer an \u201eI\u201d and \u201eit\u201d.<\/p>\n The Teaching and Genesis point in the same direction. Humanity did not come here as a punishment. It chose a way of functioning that causes division. To reverse this is to rediscover attunement to the Source.<\/p>\n VI. Exercises<\/p>\n This article does not end with a theoretical conclusion. It concludes with a few very simple exercises that can be done as part of your daily routine.<\/p>\n 1. The observation of the scales. Stop every now and then throughout the day and notice whether you are judging at that very moment. You don\u2019t need to suppress the judgement. Just notice: \u2018I\u2019ve just divided things into two.\u2019 This is good, that is bad. This is acceptable, that is shameful. The observation itself is not a judgemental act. And if you notice that, following an internal division, something has gone quiet within you and you feel a sense of emptiness, do not start to organise yourself against it. Simply recognise it: this is the death of the division. Ask the Interpreter to reverse it.<\/p>\n 2. The \u201edaat\u201d moment. Once a day, find a very brief moment when you\u2019re not weighing anything up. A sip of water. A breath of air. A ray of light through the window. Stay in that moment for three seconds without saying \u201egood\u201d or \u2018bad\u2019. Just be there. This is the original way of daat. It\u2019s tiny, and you can return to it.<\/em><\/p>\n 3. Tuning into the \u201eto\u201d. One day, you\u2019ll look at something that is in its rightful place. A tree, a person, an object, a movement, and you\u2019ll say to yourself: \u2018This is good.\u2019 Just as God says in Genesis at the time of creation. You do not compare it to anything. You do not weigh it up. You simply recognise: this is here, and it fits in its Place. This is the original sound of the tov \u2014 recognition, not judgement.<\/em><\/p>\n Part VII: Where is the series heading from here?<\/p>\n The Tree of Knowledge is a look back to the beginning of the dream, to that subtle movement with which the sleeping mind took the scales into its own hands. From this perspective, everything that has happened so far can be understood: the building of the tower, Cain\u2019s fratricide, the waters of the Flood. All sprang from the same dualistic consciousness.<\/p>\n That concludes the diagnosis. But the diagnosis alone won\u2019t take us home. In the next article, we\u2019ll ask a different sort of question: how do we even know that something is missing?<\/p>\n Sources<\/p>\n \u2022 Full text online: https:\/\/www.scribd.com\/document\/666994204\/Foundation-for-Inner-Peace-A-CSODAK-TANITASA<\/p>\n With love, Soul4you \u00b7 Georgina Kovacs \u00b7 5. cikk az \u201eEgyetlen \u00e1lom\u201d sorozatb\u00f3l – olvas\u00e1si id\u0151: kb. 10 perc Bevezet\u0151 \u2014 a torony ut\u00e1n j\u00f6n a fa Az el\u0151z\u0151 cikkben ott hagytuk B\u00e1belt: az ember egy nyelvre \u00e9p\u00fclt, egy c\u00e9lt kergetett, \u00e9s valami beleavatkozott. Sz\u00e9tsz\u00f3r\u00f3dott a nyelv, \u00e9p\u00edt\u00e9se f\u00e9lbeszakadt, \u00e9s ami ott elindult, az nem \u00e9rt v\u00e9get […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":167,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_s4y_en_tartalom":" Knowing, judging and the movement towards the Source<\/em><\/p>\n\n Soul4you \u00b7 Georgina Kovacs \u00b7 Part 5 of the One Dream series<\/p>\n\n After Babel, I return to the garden. This is not the chronological order of Genesis; it is the inward order of the questions I am following.<\/p>\n\n The builder of the tower wanted to establish a name. At the tree, I look at a related movement: the wish to possess the measure by which everything can be named, divided and judged.<\/p>\n\n What happens when the mind turns knowledge into a means of separation? And what would it mean to know without standing apart from everything we seek to know?<\/p>\n\n These are the questions of my own metaphysical reading. The Hebrew text, A Course in Miracles and the symbolic connections I make will remain distinct, even where I bring them into conversation.<\/p>\n\n Genesis places the tree of life in the garden and also names the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. (Genesis 2:9<\/a>) The latter expression brings together the Hebrew words for tree, knowledge, good and evil.<\/p>\n\n I want to look at those words without making them say more than their range permits. A dictionary can help us attend to the text, but it cannot supply an entire spiritual system by itself.<\/p>\n\n Etz is a word for a tree and for wood in a range of uses. (Strong's H6086<\/a>) The image of a tree connecting earth and sky is a symbolic possibility I contemplate, not a complete lexical definition.<\/p>\n\n For me, a tree offers an axis: rooted below, open above. The image allows me to ask how the same life can become either an object to control or a relationship in which to participate.<\/p>\n\n Da'at has a broad range that includes knowledge, understanding, discernment and skill. (Strong's H1847 and Brown\u2013Driver\u2013Briggs<\/a>) It should not be defined as always excluding information or always meaning mystical union.<\/p>\n\n The related verb yada can also be used for intimate relations, as in Genesis' description of Adam knowing Eve. (Genesis 4:1<\/a>) That use makes the language of knowing richer, but it does not determine the meaning of every occurrence of da'at.<\/p>\n\n Within my own reflection, I am especially interested in participatory knowing. What is the difference between describing a relationship from the outside and actually living it?<\/p>\n\n That is the spiritual question I bring to the word. It is not a claim that Hebrew vocabulary is identical to the specialised meaning of \u201cknowledge\u201d in A Course in Miracles.<\/p>\n\n Tov can describe what is good, pleasant, beneficial, fitting or morally right, according to context. (Strong's H2896 and Brown\u2013Driver\u2013Briggs<\/a>) Its ethical meanings should not be excluded in order to make room for a spiritual interpretation.<\/p>\n\n The repeated goodness of creation in Genesis gives me an image of recognition rather than competitive ranking. (Genesis 1<\/a>) Something is received as good without first having to defeat something else.<\/p>\n\n I express that in my own language as being in its place, in relationship with its Source. That is an interpretation of the image, not the only translation of tov.<\/p>\n\n Ra can refer to moral evil, harm, adversity, unpleasantness or calamity, with its meaning depending on the passage. (Strong's H7451 and Brown\u2013Driver\u2013Briggs<\/a>) It would be misleading to say that it never carries a moral meaning.<\/p>\n\n In this essay, I contemplate the experience of what becomes harmful or disordered when we lose our sense of relationship. I do not use that reflection to make ethical distinctions disappear.<\/p>\n\n Cruelty does not become harmless because I am exploring a reality beyond division. An inward reading must still leave room to name what people do.<\/p>\n\n The One Dream series begins from my symbolic use of Adam's deep sleep. Genesis narrates that sleep, but the absence of an explicit waking sentence does not prove that the rest of the Bible takes place inside Adam's dream. (Genesis 2:21\u201325<\/a>)<\/p>\n\n The continuing dream is my interpretive framework. Within it, the tree becomes a question about what happens when a mind already experiencing separation reaches for knowledge.<\/p>\n\n The command warns against eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and connects eating with death. (Genesis 2:16\u201317<\/a>) Genesis later speaks of return to dust and exclusion from the tree of life, so mortality cannot simply be removed from the narrative. (Genesis 3:19, 22\u201324<\/a>)<\/p>\n\n I therefore do not claim that the warning has nothing to do with physical death, or that the serpent's denial is vindicated because the humans continue living after the meal. My essay asks about an additional inward meaning.<\/p>\n\n In my reading, death can also name an estrangement within living experience. Something that could have been encountered in relationship is taken up as a scale on which everything, including the self, must be weighed.<\/p>\n\n The tree is not, for me, an argument against learning. The problem is the position from which the mind seeks to know.<\/p>\n\n Does it want to participate in truth? Or does it want an instrument through which to secure its own superiority?<\/p>\n\n The distinction can be subtle. We may call something a search for knowledge while quietly hoping that it will make us unassailable.<\/p>\n\n The serpent presents the fruit as a way for the humans' eyes to be opened and for them to become like God in knowing good and evil. (Genesis 3:4\u20135<\/a>) I hear in that promise an inward temptation to possess what can only be lived in relationship.<\/p>\n\n Within my framework, the longing beneath it is not contemptible. It is a longing for something the dreaming mind dimly remembers.<\/p>\n\n The distortion lies in the proposed movement: I will take this, make it mine, and establish myself through it. Connection is approached as acquisition.<\/p>\n\n The woman sees the fruit as good for food, desirable to the eyes and desirable for gaining wisdom; she eats and gives some to her husband. (Genesis 3:6<\/a>) In this sequence, I contemplate the moment when longing becomes grasping.<\/p>\n\n That is not a judgement against women or a claim that one sex carries the blame for humanity's condition. Both figures belong to the inward landscape I am reading.<\/p>\n\n The question can arise in any of us. Am I reaching for what is true, or for what I hope will make me secure against every uncertainty?<\/p>\n\n After eating, the man and woman recognise their nakedness and make coverings from fig leaves. (Genesis 3:7<\/a>) The narrative gives me a striking image of a changed relationship with the self.<\/p>\n\n The body has not become a different body in that moment. What changes, in my reading, is the manner in which it is encountered.<\/p>\n\n The mind begins to divide: acceptable and unacceptable, presentable and shameful. Something once simply lived becomes something to assess and conceal.<\/p>\n\n I connect this, within my metaphysical framework, with a remaining memory of unity. A diminished account of myself can hurt partly because it does not correspond to what I believe I am at the Source.<\/p>\n\n That is my interpretation, not a psychological law proving that every instance of shame comes from a memory of spiritual wholeness. Actual humiliation and mistreatment also need to be recognised for what they are.<\/p>\n\n The inward possibility is that shame need not become identity. I can examine what I have done, or what has been done to me, without reducing my being to the most painful interpretation of it.<\/p>\n\n Nothing in my argument requires knowledge itself to be the enemy. What concerns me is the confusion between knowing and possessing a judgement.<\/p>\n\n A Course in Miracles distinguishes changing, interpretative perception from knowledge as timeless certainty. (Text, chapter 3, III.1\u20136<\/a>) It also says that right-mindedness concerns corrected perception and should not be confused with the knowing mind. (Text, chapter 3, IV.4<\/a>)<\/p>\n\n I bring those distinctions to the tree without claiming that they are the lexical meaning of da'at. The connection is philosophical and spiritual, not a translation equation.<\/p>\n\n For me, the judging mind stands apart and organises what it sees around itself. Direct knowing, in the metaphysical sense I am exploring, recognises a relationship that this division has obscured.<\/p>\n\n That does not mean that I should abandon judgement when choosing whom to trust, how to act or whether someone is safe. It means that practical discernment need not become a total verdict on the essence of a person.<\/p>\n\n I can know that an action was harmful without believing that the harm is the whole truth of the being who acted. I can recognise shared spiritual origin without offering access to someone who remains unsafe.<\/p>\n\n Genesis explicitly describes God sending the human out of the garden and guarding the way to the tree of life. (Genesis 3:22\u201324<\/a>) I do not remove that action from the text by saying the passage contains only an impersonal psychological consequence.<\/p>\n\n In my own inward reading, however, expulsion also becomes the experience of estrangement. A mind organised entirely around separation does not experience the unity in which, I believe, its being remains grounded.<\/p>\n\n The distance is real as an experience, even if separation is not the ultimate reality in my metaphysical account. This is the tension the One Dream framework asks me to hold.<\/p>\n\n I cannot end it simply by announcing that I am already at home. I can begin by becoming willing to see differently.<\/p>\n\n In The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times, Ren\u00e9 Gu\u00e9non criticises the reduction of qualitative reality to predominantly quantitative measures. (Chapters 1\u20133 and 7<\/a>) His traditionalist framework is distinct from both Genesis and the Course.<\/p>\n\n I hear a resonance rather than an identity between them. The scales can weigh something, but weighing is not the only relationship we can have with it.<\/p>\n\n A relationship's duration does not tell us everything about its quality. The number of ideas I can repeat does not establish how deeply I have lived any one of them.<\/p>\n\n Measurement has its place. The difficulty begins when I forget that it has a place and ask it to become the whole of knowing.<\/p>\n\n In John's Gospel, Jesus speaks of himself as the bread of life and, elsewhere, as the way, the truth and the life. (John 6:35<\/a>; John 14:6<\/a>) I contemplate those images beside the garden as a call towards participation rather than detached possession.<\/p>\n\n This does not make the New Testament a replacement for the Hebrew Bible or imply that Jewish tradition offers judgement while Christianity offers life. I am following a personal connection between particular images.<\/p>\n\n Bread is received and lived from. A way is travelled.<\/p>\n\n In my reading, the movement towards the Source is not the construction of a better spiritual ranking. It is a recovery of relationship.<\/p>\n\n Pause when a judgement has become a complete account of yourself or another person. Ask what happened, what needs a response, and what additional verdict you have attached to it.<\/p>\n\n You do not have to suppress the judgement. You can notice it without making it final.<\/p>\n\n Take an ordinary moment: a sip of water, a comfortable breath, light entering a room. For a few seconds, let it be present without needing to compare or classify it.<\/p>\n\n I offer this as a small practice of attention, not as proof that you have entered the state called knowledge in the Course. The value lies in making room, not awarding yourself a spiritual level.<\/p>\n\n Notice something you can receive as good without ranking it above something else. It may be a careful gesture, a living tree or a moment of honest contact.<\/p>\n\n For me, this is a way of contemplating tov: recognition of goodness without turning it into a weapon of comparison. It is an application inspired by the word, not its exclusive original meaning.<\/p>\n\n The tree brings me back to the movement beneath the earlier stories: the mind dividing, defending and trying to secure itself. In this series, that is the common thread I see in the conflict, the flood and the tower.<\/p>\n\n But recognising a pattern is not the same as returning home. A further question remains: how do we know that anything is missing?<\/p>\n\n The next essay follows that quieter thread through pain, shame and longing. For now, I leave the scales beside the tree and ask whether I can meet what is here without immediately trying to stand above it.<\/p>\n\n With love,\n
\n
\nGeorgina
\nSoul4you \u00b7 soul4you.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The words of the tree<\/h2>\n\n
Etz: tree<\/h2>\n\n
Da'at: knowledge<\/h2>\n\n
Tov: good<\/h2>\n\n
Ra: evil or bad<\/h2>\n\n
When the sleeping mind takes up the scales<\/h2>\n\n
The serpent's promise<\/h2>\n\n
Opened eyes and a changed self-image<\/h2>\n\n
What is wrong with knowledge?<\/h2>\n\n
Leaving the garden<\/h2>\n\n
Gu\u00e9non and the limits of measuring<\/h2>\n\n
Images of life<\/h2>\n\n
Three small practices<\/h2>\n\n
Notice the scales<\/h3>\n\n
Allow a moment of participation<\/h3>\n\n
Recognise goodness without competition<\/h3>\n\n
What follows the question of knowledge?<\/h3>\n\n
Georgina
Soul4you<\/p>","_s4y_en_cim":"The Tree of Knowledge","_s4y_en_kivonat":"One Dream, Part 5: Knowing, judging and the movement towards the Source.","footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-179","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-spiritualis"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/soul4you.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/179","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/soul4you.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/soul4you.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/soul4you.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/soul4you.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=179"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/soul4you.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/179\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":258,"href":"https:\/\/soul4you.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/179\/revisions\/258"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/soul4you.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/167"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/soul4you.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=179"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/soul4you.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=179"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/soul4you.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=179"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}