If one is going to discuss God, the first thing one must do is acknowledge that in all the great theistic Traditions (Abrahamic, Hermetic, Brahminic, Sufic, Kaballistic, to name a few), there is the apparent dichotomy of, to use the Christian terms, the apophatic and the cataphatic approach to the Deity. So, in whatever Tradition one speaks, God is, eventually and ultimately, a Mystery, beyond all human comprehension, precisely because the Deity will transcend anything that can be predicated of It.
In light of that, one can say that for those traditions that recognise a deity, God is the hypostatic Word spoken out of the darkess — be it Memra, Logos, Verbum, Word, Aum — and the very idea of 'word' infers a communication, in the first instance, and the triad of communicator, communication, communicant in the second.
God is the Absolute, and being the Absolute, God is equally the Infinite; being both the Absolute and the Infinite, intrinsically and without duality, God is also the Perfect. Absoluteness is reflected in the finite by movement; in space by the point or center; in time, by the moment.
The Absolute by definition comprises the Infinite, and, as All-Possibility, it is the principle and cause of the finite, which is relative, contingent, ephemeral ... it is this which comprises everything this side of the Veil, or Maya, as it is known in the East.
The Infinite determines the finite — in space by by extension; in time by duration; in matter by substantial indefiniteness; in form by the limitless diversity of formal possibilities; in number by a quantitative limitlessness.
The finite speaks of the Divine Perfection and the Divine Plenitude. It should be understood that the finite is an aspect of, rather than 'other than', the infinite. To suggest the finite as something other than the infinite is to limit the infinite, which is illogical and contradictory. Furthermore to thus say that the Deity is not in some way present in or to the finite is to say that the infinitude of the Deity is conditional, which is a contradiction. Likewsie to say that the Infinite is the sum of all finitude is equally erroneous.
The Infinite orders the finite, and then issues the Word as the source and origin of being, as well as its good and its end. Herein the Word will comprise the Law, intended to regulate the human world and above all to regulate the microcosm that is the individual.
It is important never to lose sight of the fact that the term “God” designates the Divinity, either in all its possible aspects – hence also beyond every aspect – or in some particular aspect, notably that of the Creator. It is necessarily thus because this term cannot contain in itself a privative nuance.
It should be noted here that the word “God” does not and cannot admit of any restriction for the simple reason that God is “all that is purely principial” and that He is thus also – and a fortiori – Beyond-Being; this one may not know or may deny, but one cannot deny that God is “That which is supreme” and therefore also That which nothing can surpass.
God does not “exist” in the sense that He cannot be brought down to the level of the existence of things. In order to make it clear that this reservation implies no kind of privation it would be better to say that God is “non-inexistent”.
When it is said that Jesus Christ is God, it should be understood that the Incarnation is the Supreme Principle “entering” into universal Relativity, hence still “Supreme” despite the “entering,” which enables one to affirm that God the Creator and Legislator is at one and the same time Atma and Maya, or Atma in Maya, but never simply Maya.
On the one hand, God is the “Other” who is infinitely “above” the world, and on the other hand, the world is His manifestation in which He is present; this implies that without this immanence the world would be reduced to nothing, and that the world – and all that it contains – is necessarily symbolical. In a certain sense, nothing resembles God; but in another sense, everything resembles Him, at least with respect to positive, not negative, manifestation.
Likewise, the human subject – the ego – is as though suspended between “elevation” and “depth”: between the Divine Being which resides “in the Heavens,” and the Divine Self which resides “in the depths of the heart.” The first is the separative dimension, that of adoration, worship, law, obedience, in short, of religion; the second is the unitive perspective, that of wisdom and union; or that of pure sanctity, which by definition is “being” and not merely “thought.”
When someone says 'I am spiritual but not religious' it is tantamount to the denial of the aforesaid separative dimension. This dimension actually prepares and sanctifies the soul in readiness for the descent into the heart, and without it, union is not possible. The spirituality thus spoken of here is that of the psychic self, the ego, it is the realm of thought, rather than the pneumatic self, which is the realm of being.
By saying "God is love" infers, even in a small and contingent way, that one loves God. It means one chooses Truth, and then the will is directed to and makes us conscious of an absolute and transcendent Reality – at once personal and meta-personal – and the will that attaches itself to it and recognises in it its own supernatural essence and its ultimate end.
God bless,
Thomas
