What if you were God -- and didn't know it?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

This is not an expression of my beliefs, but simply an attempt to follow a certainly line of thinking to its natural conclusion. My apologies if anyone finds it offensive.

As many people know, the Rastafarians of Jamaica believe that Ras Tafari, another name for the late Emperor Haile selassie of Ethiopia was the living manifestation of God on Earth. However, Selassie himself was a devout Christian, and completely repudiated this belief. But what if the Rastas were correct (not my belief, by the way) and Selassie really was God, but just did not know it?

In Ann Rice's extremely provocative novel, Memnoch the Devil, she actually presents a scenerio in which Memnoch challenges God to experience being human without the knowledge that he was actually God. What if that is exactly what happened, that God returned to the flesh but buried His certainty of divinity in order to experience what it was like to be truly human?

Could such a thing really happen? (Note, I'm not saying that it DID happen, just speculating for the sake of the idea.) What would be the ramifications of such a thing? Certainly, Selassie was a great and regal man, but one with human foibles nonetheless. Would a human manifestation of God necessarily be without faults?

Have I simply lost my mind?

[Sassafras]

*runs away*

Well, first of all, one must, of necessity, believe that divinity exists and then there needs to be a general consensus on the nature of that divinity ...

I assume you aren't including enlightenment in your speculation? Like Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha? Or Lao Tzu? or any number of wise men throughout history whose teaching have now taken on the trappings of 'religion'.

So, if we are limited to Christian/Judaic theology ... without a whole lot of thought, I'd say it would be impossible for God made carnate to be corrupted in any way. Now, how such a being would be perceived is another interesting speculation ... I'm guessing that he/she might appear a bit simple and lacking in sophisticated social skills ... hmmm ... this requires more than I at first thought. How would such a trusting, loving, forgiving individual survive in this modern age?

[Jnyusa]

Very interesting idea, Voronwë, with some interesting theological ramifications. (No, you haven't lost your mind)

I recall being told by the Rabbi at my synagogue when I was ... perhaps college age? ... that Selasie was a Falasha and therefore also a Jew under Jewish law. I've never bothered to confirm or disconfirm this, though I should probably do so now.

As you've probably been instructed in school, authors write "Christ symbols" into their books, to the delight of English teachers who send their students on the hunt for such meanings. There is a sort of corresponding symbolic figure in Jewish literature - the Madman - who carries God's truth without being aware of it. Because he stands outside society he sees society more clearly than those who are wrapped up in its illusions and delusions. The idea you've presented here is very close, I think, to the literary idea of the Madman.

I believe that these two symbolic characters - Christ symbol and Madman - must be very closely related to one another at some philosophical level because when my daughters were in school they had an English teacher who was positively fixated on Christ symbols, but every time she would identify one she would be wrongly identifying a Madman. The critical difference between the two symbols is that the Christ symbol must know that he/she is sacrificing on behalf of all others and must do so willingly, whereas the Madman does it in spite of him/herself ... is more a puppet of God, in a way, but also a noble figure when seen from the proper perspective, that is, the perspective from outside the social quagmire.

Put another way, the Madman is usually used to illuminate the fact that all of soceity is mad, just mad in a mutually acceptable way, which can only be understood by the one who stands outside and looks in. Simon in Lord of the Flies is a good example of this, and perhaps the first to appear in mainstream modern literature. His death is not the redemption of the children's society but its final and utter rejection of redemption.

The use of this symbolic character in mainstream lit. seems to be a post-WWII phenomenon.

It will be very interesting for me to hear other posters' thoughts about this. It is, imo, a very powerful idea and a theme quite suited to 'modern' literature.

Jn

edit: cross posted with Sass!

Sass, I think your last question is precisely the right question to ask. How would such a figure survive in modern society? All the others who have inserted this kind of figure into their literature (to my knowledge) have ended up killing him or consigning him to a mental institution where his insights are delegitimized.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Thanks for taking this seriously, Sass and Jn. I was afraid that no one would.

I'll have to think about what you have said and come back to this.

[nerdanel]

Because he stands outside society he sees society more clearly than those who are wrapped up in its illusions and delusions.

I question whether someone within a given system (incl. society) - a human - can have the perfect understanding of it that we associate with the Divine. I also question the very idea of Divinity able fully to divorce Itself from the "certainty of divinity" to which you refer, in order to most fully experience humanity.

So, my tentative answer to whether such a thing could really happen is, "I don't think so" - but I hope to give a more full answer at a later date; I don't think the idea is without merit. The problem is that this thread, and particularly Jn's response, relates to some ideas that have been swirling around in my head all this week, dealing with two very distinct concepts - Ainulindalë and (musical) perfect pitch - I hope eventually to write two separate HoF posts on these ideas. And on that note, now that I've convinced you all that *I'm* the one who is going crazy, I shall depart this thread, eventually to return (hopefully with less insane babblings next time).

[Teremia]

Voronwë -- what makes you think your hypothetical is not in fact the case?

If we were all gods, unbeknownst to ourselves, how would life on earth look any different than it does now?

It seems to me that we all do have a bit of God's light in us. If there is any such thing as "God," it is, moreover, (seems to me), generated by the Light in each of us responding to the Light of those we meet.

Of course it is heartbreaking that the Light has to get mixed up with so much cruelty, doubt and sorrow. But that's what happens when things decide to try Existing in real life, instead of Not Existing, which is much cleaner -- though much much less interesting.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

It seems to me that we all do have a bit of God's light in us. If there is any such thing as "God," it is, moreover, (seems to me), generated by the Light in each of us responding to the Light of those we meet.

Ah, Teremia Saelind, you speak very close to that which I believe.

[Rowanberry]

Teremia, that is something that I could have said as well.

There's a line in (the translation that I have of) Tao Te Ching that is very close to the thoughts that you presented, and also resonates with my spirituality:

Use your own light
and return to the source of light.
This is called practising eternity.

So, maybe we all have a little bit of the divine light in us, and in some people, it simpy shines clearer than in the most.

[Frelga]

I, too, am very close to Teremia's line of thinking.

Consider - those of us who accept the Bible as a Holy Book are told that human beings were created "in the likeness of God". Surely this can't mean a physical likeness, when our bodies are subject to fear, hunger and lust just like those of any animal. It has to be the divine spark, the spiritual likeness, what we call our soul.

My thinking on this topic is influenced by my very limited knowledge of Jewish mysticism, and by Neil Walsh's Conversations with God. Walsh's way of putting it is that the God exist in the realm of absolute. When the divine spark, the soul, enters the limited physical realm of the relative, it has the chance to experience goodness, light, love because it now has something to measure against.

In essence, Walsh says that what we are is God experiencing Godself as good and loving in the realm where a choice can be made to not be so.

It seems to me that we all do have a bit of God's light in us. If there is any such thing as "God," it is, moreover, (seems to me), generated by the Light in each of us responding to the Light of those we meet.

I've seen this viewpoint, which I'm sure has a name - that God is an expression of the collective power of human consciousness. The way you put it is much more beautiful, although not entirely the way I'm seeing it.

[truehobbit]

LOL, I thought Rastafari defined itself by wearing an icky hairdo.
Sorry if that's offensive, but I had to laugh out loud at hearing this about Haile Selassie. But, then, the idea that this guy crowned himself emperor has always made me laugh, too.

I also tend to find Anne Rice's books outrageously silly, though initially entertaining. Her books are often offensive for a Christian, so maybe they are provocative in that sense, but I wouldn't call her writings provocative in the sense of provoking serious thought.

So, I'm afraid in order to think about this question, I have to chuck all the premises out (and I'm aware I might be a bit harsh here, for Tol Eressëa, I hope I'm not offending, though.)

What if that is exactly what happened, that God returned to the flesh but buried His certainty of divinity in order to experience what it was like to be truly human?

I'm afraid I find that this doesn't make a lot of sense
If God wanted to experience what it's like to be human, He'd have to be conscious that He is experiencing this.
Of course any memory of Godhead might be seen to mitigate the experience, but without such memory, how can it be called an experience?
If the human that is God at no time in his/her life remembered that he/she was God, how would God in the end remember to return to himself, as it were, and evaluate the experience?
In order to become conscious of an experience you have made and to reflect on it, you need to step back and look at it from outside, so to speak.
If you don't have the power to step outside, because you don't know there is an outside to step to, something beyond the situation you are in, you'll not be able to digest something as an experience.

Compare it to youself wanting to experience what it's like to be an animal. I think you can only consciously experience this as long as you are aware that you are not actually an animal.
Or, if you were to completely relinquish your humanity in order to experience animal-ness, you'd need someone else to bring you back into humanity, hoping that you'd remember the time when you were an animal (which, seeing you are completely an animal and we don't know what the cognitive powers of animals are may not be much) - however, I'm not sure how that should work with God turning into a human.

[Frelga]

If the human that is God at no time in his/her life remembered that he/she was God, how would God in the end remember to return to himself, as it were, and evaluate the experience?

Through the death of the physical body when the soul returns to its Source?

Not that I insist on this being the truth, mind. I'm just saying that, hypothetically, it could work that way. Or some other way.

Actually, now that I re-read your post, I see that your assumption is that only one human being is God. I was coming from the view that it is every human being - that it is the nature of the human being and the very essence of humanity.

[Jnyusa]

Hobby: In order to become conscious of an experience you have made and to reflect on it, you need to step back and look at it from outside, so to speak.

Hence the purpose of meditation and prayer, I think.

If one accepts the notion of reincarnation, perhaps what we are learning through many lifetimes is how to remember that we are god?

<small 'g,' for this would be quite different from what is usually meant by 'God.'>

Jn

[Sassafras]

Frelga wrote:

Actually, now that I re-read your post, I see that your assumption is that only one human being is God. I was coming from the view that it is every human being - that it is the nature of the human being and the very essence of humanity

Actually, I thought that was the point of this excercise .. a speculation on the nature of a person who actually was manifest Divinity without any awareness of his/her real nature ... God.

Would a human manifestation of God necessarily be without faults

Not a discussion of the nature of God within humanity, or how we may all possibly carry a divine spark or a reflection of the divine within ourselves.

Two entirely different topics, IMO.

[truehobbit]

Through the death of the physical body when the soul returns to its Source?

But that would mean that the soul of this particular being is something of an alien inhabiting the body for a time, but having a life of its own.

I see that your assumption is that only one human being is God

Yes, that was the initial quesion, I think. If God turned into a human, to see what it's like, but - as opposed to Jesus, I suppose, who knew who he was - would be without any knowledge of his or her original divinity.
If that happened, anyone could be that person, because they wouldn't know they'd be God.

Hence the purpose of meditation and prayer, I think.

Yes, you need awareness - the Deity that is human needs to be aware of its godliness, otherwise that whole thing doesn't work. Whether the awareness is just there, or is given or gained at some point doesn't make a difference, I think. The premise here was that there is no such awareness.

I guess what Frelga suggested would be the only option.

I'm sorry, I find this whole discussion somewhat distasteful- I shouldn't get involved.

[Jnyusa]

In some ways it is just as difficult to imagine God being a human and still aware that he is God, while at the same time being fully human, as it is to imagine that he could be human and not be aware that he was God and at the same time be fully God ... both notions imply, I think, a god who is able to be other than what he/she is. Which brings us to the Athrabeth ...

Jn

[Voronwë the Faithful]

If Eru wished to do this, I do not doubt that He would find a way, though I cannot foresee it.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

LOL, I thought Rastafari defined itself by wearing an icky hairdo.

Actually, most Rastafarians -- indeed, most people with dreadlocks -- are extremely fastidious about their hair. And some are quite beautiful.

More to the point, while I am not a Rastafarian, some of the most spiritual people that I know (both personally and through music) are Rastafarians, and I attribute my own spiritual renaissance (such as it is) as much to them as to any other source. So I would hope that you would pay as much respect to my beliefs (such as they are) as I try to do to yours.

Sorry if that's offensive, but I had to laugh out loud at hearing this about Haile Selassie. But, then, the idea that this guy crowned himself emperor has always made me laugh, too.

I think your knowledge about Haile Salassie is probably fairly superficial. I'll mention that he is someone that I have conflicted thoughts and feelings about, but largely admire, and leave it at that.

[truehobbit]

I'm sorry, Voronwë, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings, but I think we are arrived at a point where your spiritualism is my blasphemy.

I'll just stay out of this discussion.

[Padme]

I beleive we are all part of God, that we each have some piece of God in us. I also believe that the good we do to others, as well as the bad, we do to God. So to ask me if God is in human form, I would say yes, in all of us, in everything.

Thats my Zen rant for the day.

[Frelga]

Padme, that's pretty much where I am, too. And the next logical step is, us being the part of one whole, whatever we do to others we do to ourselves.