Talk:Qliphoth
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What are the sources for this page. Until the information is properly documented, I do not think it should be merged. These are interesting ideas, but need support from somewhere. Wjbentley 02:42, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
Seeing as how the Tree of Life and Sephiroth are merged, might as well merge Tree of Death and Qliphoth. Might as well keep things symetrical. Nortonew 15:52, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
- Merge. Should be easily done, with a redirect from Tree of death to Qliphoth. meco 09:12, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Samael doesn't lead to the appropriate page. The correct page, one concerning the tree of death, does not seem to exist as it is not listed on the disambiguation page. I dont know enough to create one. Anon. 22:02 29 November 2005.
Does anybody have any sources for this stuff? any at all? seeing as it is so radically out of line with traditional kabbalah?
- Egads. I have sources for the info on this page, but possibly not for each statement. I will be adding more info as soon as I can.
- This should not be merged with the Tree of Life page, seeing as how it would make the page larger, resulting in moving the data back to this page again. The Tree of Life page should have a general summary, and this should be the main page for the material on the Qlippoth, or Adverse Tree (tree of death....who named this article?) Zos 01:27, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merged
I've merged this page with the Qliphoth page. I took some things out, and also added citation notes for a few things. Also, the Hermetic, Judaic, and Luciferian sections need sources if i'm not mistaken. I'll add more when I get a change. I have loads of information for this page. Zos 02:46, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
- Copying content from Talk:Qliphoth following article merger. __meco 08:15, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
<- copy begin ->
I have made a fully new version of the article, and believe that it settles all discussion points mentioned here before. So I removed them. Bring up new ones. :-) Denial 19:27, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Style question (admittedly much less earth-shattering than what has gone before): the use of capitalization is very inconsistent. I have cleaned a bit of this up, (Kabbalah/Qabalah, Judaic, Hasidic, etc.) but I'm unable to find consistent supportive evidence for qliphoth/Qliphoth and sephiroth/Sephiroth. I believe both should be capitalized, but my knowledge comes from sources that are not neutral. Is it correct to not capitalize these? Canonblack 05:00, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
I think they only need to be capitalized when in the begining of a sentence, not in mid sentence unless its to link to another page. Zos 15:53, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hermetic?
I found the hermetic interpretation of thjis article extremely biased and pro jewish. Many of these theories come under the misunderstanding of hermeic philosophy and are extremely pro-monotheistic. thusly, i am deleteing some of the outragious statements and hope either I feel sober and have enough time off work to improve the hermetic section myself or someone else will do it for me. I also have a problem with this whole paragraph.
'Kabbalah as interpreted in Hermeticism God is sometimes thought to shine with his pure, divine light into a chaotic darkness, Tohu va-Bohu, that did not cease to exist when God created light and order (the contrasting view in Judaic Kabbalah supports that the act of creation by God required retraction of the divine essence or tzimtzum; the notion of void or matter external to God is antithetical to Judaic Kabbalah, which leans toward panentheism). This darkness is equated to the qliphoth and also represents evil, because it is thought to be opposite or antagonistic to God's creation.'
Hermeticism originated with the corupus hermeticum amongst other documents via the first and third century a.d. and I don't think this statement reflects those theories at all. Besides which, Later hermetic theory (rosicrusians, papus, paracelsus, john dee, golden dawn, etc. etc. etc.) do not seem to reflect this view nor do i see this cited at all. If you can site this opinion. Then by all means include it. Otherwise I am deleting it. JaynusofSinope
<- copy end ->
-
- I agree...whoever wrote this was confusing some issues. Just b/c the majority of the people from the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn published and popularized alot of material, doesn't make it Hermetic. But non the less, I merged as much as I felt didn't conflict with this article. I was going to edit it after I woke! Zos 15:51, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] New Additions
I've added alot of info to the page. I know this has to be cleaned up, and will work to getting that done soon. Zos 17:18, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Anyone wishing to give me a hand, would be greatly apprecitated. Zos 18:02, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I added some to this page. If I can find the Golden Dawn by Regardie soon, I'll add his breif writing on the matter. Other than that I can't recall who else did an interpretation on the qlippoth (besides that mike ford guy). Zos 07:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
