Context: So I’m a bard in a homebrew session. Oracles were being kidnapped, and a huge plot twist was that one of my teammates (Aharoni) was an Oracle. We also found out that his entire family was, technically, the same Oracle, through a sort of hivemind. This was because they were channeling the most powerful god there was, Ein Soph.
Me: “Wait… Aharoni, I slept with your sister… which means I slept with you, your dad, and YOUR MOM!!!”
Logo of the Church ov Nothing, the CovN, pronounced “coven”.
The Hebrew around the outside is “אור אין סוף”, (”Ohr Ein Sof” or “Ain Soph Aur” is frequently seen). It is the limitless light, the culmination of the “אין” (“Ein”, non-being), “אין סוף” (”Ein Sof”, limitlessness). Non-being is not limited to be nothing because it is not that either, and so it is all things. All states of being and all contradictions. Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.
This is the essential vibration between being and non-being. Reflected across the center is the binary representation of the gematria values of each, symbolizing the transition between limitlessness and definition of limits.
Each star in the limitless light is a seed of being that gives birth to a reality, unfolding its pattern, the Will, symbolized by the fractal, but always at the core is the dance of being and non-being giving birth to new reality.
Though all other interpretations are also equally true.
I guess I’ve been wondering if a belief I hold is okay. I think for me I think of the universe sort of as one whole energy, and that people have different ways of thinking of that energy and that’s cool, be that gods, science, etc. So I suppose I may be pantheistic(?) I think of that energy as being Adonai, and I was wondering if it would be okay for me to build a relationship with a god (etc.) with the idea that they are a part of an eventual whole, so long as they didn’t find it disrespectful? I want to explore that idea but I also don’t want to be appropriative, and I know there can be a very fine line.
(posted anon by request)
Okay, as I feared, this is not one where I can give you the ‘right’ Jewish answer. I can only give you what I know and what I have read that might be of use.
We look at Bereshit (Genesis, for my goyische followers), and the first line is “Bereshit Bara Elohim”. The very first instance in which we “see” God, it’s with a name that has a plural form. It’s not the tetragrammaton, it’s not Adonai. A very strict (though perhaps inaccurate) reading would translate that as “gods”. And there’s a lot of interesting analysis of that verse, because it almost can be read with Elohim as the object: “In the beginning, Elohim were created”.
It’s an interesting line of thought, this idea that Elohim is an emanation of Ein Soph, of the infinite, the limitless. I went trawling Wikipedia for more material and found an article that describes the tzimtzum, the withdrawal of Ein Soph, to be described by Chasidic Jews as “only illusionary concealment of the Ohr Ein Sof, giving rise to MonisticPanentheism. Consequently, Hasidism focuses on the Atzmus Divine essence, rooted higher within the Godhead than the Ein Sof, which is limited to infinitude, and reflected in the essence (Etzem) of the Torah and the soul.” That’s a mouthful, but note the word pantheism in there.
So. To cut the the core of the question: nope, I don’t think that viewpoint is, itself, appropriative.