>>10544479Well, I'll ramble a bit on possession in terms of whatever comes to mind. For a backdrop I would say the spiritual tradition I find most affinity with is a subset of Tibetan Buddhism influenced by early pre-Tibetan Shamanism called Bon shamanism - here are two wikis for each --
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dzogchen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BonSo as far as possession goes and God goes, I view God as perhaps conceptualized by the human mind as what one might call Ultimate Reality, or the ultimate backdrop of everything we experience. Many religions might refer to it, and some seem to personalize it. But for me I like the medieval Christian definition of "that which no greater can be conceived."
But that brings up the question of what 'greater' means in that context, and also brings up that there are many different things which cannot be conceived of. So I tend to view God as "Ultimate Reality" or "Ultimate Truth Outside of Human Conception," and even Christian teachings tend to think that even 'personalizing' God as an entity is somewhat misleading due to humans historical relationship with 'persons' in general.
So... in terms of possession, I think of it generally in terms of relationship to a self, and the individual self biological humans tend to constellate around. If someone is 'possessed,' for me it generally means that another form of life is utilizing a human's self in service of the self of whatever is doing the possessing. So, in many traditions, this actually might be a good thing, depending on 'the tradeoff' whatever is possessing is making with the human (or whatever previous entity is in relationship with that human self).
I also tend to think of these things in terms of, to what interest is a human working towards, to what benefit are their goals formulated, and to what ends are their goals being formulated.
So in terms of acting in the interest of God... (continued)
