Reading Giorgi does not make one knowledgeable of QBL any more than
reading that perv, Crowley, does.

http://niggerwise.com


On Nov 6, 11:07 am, Isparklaria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Nov 6, 11:36 am, BBDD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is no reason to think Shakespeare
>
> > had any knowledge. That is based on a very weak legend the Shakespeare
> > and Francis Bacon were one and the same person
>
> Many people who do *NOT* believe that Bacon and Newton were the same
> person have some to the conclusion that Shakespeare was involved in
> QBL from studying his plays, especially The Merchant of Venice.
>
> This is a link to and part of any essay by one such 
> person:http://74.125.45.104/search?q=cache:T5D_2SECqxAJ:www.danielyharris.co...
>
> The Merchant of Venice was written in 1598 and first performed in
> 1600, the year Hamlet was written and the year Giordano Bruno was
> burnt at the stake, in Venice, his books used at kindling. The decade
> of the 1590’s in England was the era of the Jewish Converso, Rodrigo
> Lopez (accused of trying to poison Queen Elizabeth and burnt at the
> stake) and Marlowe’s Barabbas, in addition to being the era of wide-
> spread Christian Cabala among the literati. The difference between
> Barabbas and Shylock (and Shylock does lament that his daughter had
> not eloped with one from the stock of Barabbas) is that Barabbas is a
> Jew-baiting cartoon of agit-prop meant to incite emotive response to
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------­-----
> Page 10
> Shakespeare, Kabbalah and the Occult, DYH, 10foment antisemitism.
> Shylock is a dignified, albeit rapturous human being and the most
> powerful dramatic voice that Shakespeare had yet created between 1589
> and 1596. Influenced by Giorgi, Shakespeare produced in The Merchant
> of Venice a music-of-the-spheres poetry that would be rivaled only by
> Hamlet and Sir John Falstaff. According to Yates who reads Daniel
> Banes’s book The Provocative Merchant of Venice, Shakespeare read
> Giorgi’s De Harmonia in French in 1595. Shakespeare’s absorption of
> Giorgi leads Banes to surmise that the Venice of his play is a
> kabbalistic Eden replete with a Tree of Life and ten Sefirot. Banes
> names Antonio Hesed, names Shylock Gevurah and Portia Tiferet. Albeit
> provocative, we may surmise that the entire Merchant of Venice is
> gevuric and that Shylock is Shakespeare’s own invention of his
> emerging poetic autobiography. Portia is certainly beautiful and
> bestowed with some of Shakespeare’s most powerful poetry. Antonio is
> certainly touched with love, albeit the homoerotic kind. Bassanio is
> clever enough to pick the lead casket, which Daniel Banes says is
> symbolic of Judaism.Respectively, the three caskets represent the
> three religions: gold=Christianity; silver=Islam; lead=Judaism. Banes
> quotes Proverbs 8:10-11, Choose my discipline, and not silver/Choose
> understanding, and not fine gold;/For wisdom is better than
> rubies.According to Giorgi, lead represents Saturn which represents
> the religion of the Jews. It is by choosing the religion of the Jews,
> the Torah that Bassanio wins his Christian princess. We may even
> surmise that the lovely poetry expounded by Lorenzo before his beloved
> Jessica is indeed cherubic, but it seems to pale, as does the verse
> employed by Portia, before the Kadmonic Shylock, who resonates with a
> powerful life-creating force.In fact, Shylock is the Shakespearian
> giest which propelled Shakespeare to invent Sir John Falstaff and
> Hamlet. Without the rapturous kabbalistic emptying out of core force,
> Shakespeare could not have moved on to the very limits of literary art
> with Hamlet. Shylock inherits the Generations of Adam and cleaves to
> adamic invention, thus the pound of flesh, which reminds one of the
> weight of adamic clay-flesh employed by Yahweh at the primal scene of
> invention. Shylock is Shakespeare’s first Kabbalist and hisfirst reach
> through the agonic play of word-creating lifeforms. He employed the
> gevuric strength of “the Jew,” which he understood through Giorgi and
> Bruno as well as “the Jew” of antisemitism, to create his own Kadmonic
> poet of the dark soul, who must be content at the end, as Shakespeare
> must be content as his creation. In 1596, Shakespeare realized with
> Shylock, that he (Shakespeare) possessed a talent which would exceed
> the limits of the stage. This Kabbalic exceeding was no less than the
> Adam Kadmon, the poet of God-names reaching unknown regions of the
> psyche and soul all for the sake of invention, artistry and doing
> God’s work as the ancient writers did. Sources Philip Beitchman,
> Alchemy of the Word: Cabala of the Renaissance, State University of
> New Press, Albany, 1988 Frances A. Yates, The Art of Memory, The
> University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1966 Frances A. Yates, The
> Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age, Routledge Classics, New
> York, 1979
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------­-----
> Page 11
> Shakespeare, Kabbalah and the Occult, DYH, 11Frances A. Yates, Majesty
> and Magic in Shakespeare’s Last Plays, Shambhala, Boulder, 1978 Daniel
> Banes, The Provocative Merchant of Venice, Malcolm House Publications,
> Chicago, 1975 Daniel Banes, Shakespeare, Shylock and Kabbalah, Malcolm
> House Publications, Chicago, 1978 David B. Ruderman, Editor, Essential
> Papers on Jewish Culture in Renaissance and Baroque Italy, NY
> University Press, New York, 1992 Gershom Scholem, On the Mystical
> Shape of the Godhead, Schocken Books, New York, 1991 Gershom Scholom,
> Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, Schocken, New York, 1967 Moshe Idel,
> Messianic Mystics, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1998 Daniel C.
> Matt, The Zohar, Pritzker Edition Volumes 1-3, Stanford Edition,
> 2004-2005 Harold Bloom, David Rosenberg, The Book of J, Grove
> Weidenfeld, New York, 1990 Linda Woodbridge, The Scythe of Saturn,
> Shakespeare and Magical Thinking, University of Illinois Press, Urbana
> and Chicago, 1994 Arthur Versluis, Shakespeare the Magus, Grail
> Publications, St. Paul, 2001 Daniel Y. Harris, “The Night Moses de
> Leon Died,” In Posse Review, Issue #15, on the 
> Internet,http://www.webdelsol.com/InPosse/harris15.htmAddendumShakespeare,
> Kabbalah, and the Occult is part of a reader produced by Lehrhaus
> Judaica for “Engagement and Learning for Leaders: Jewish Community
> Federation SonomaStudy Group,” 2007
>
> On Nov 6, 11:36 am, BBDD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Not to nit pick, but Newton was not knowledgeable of QBL, while
> > knowledgeable of related work. There is no reason to think Shakespeare
> > had any knowledge. That is based on a very weak legend the Shakespeare
> > and Francis Bacon were one and the same person. Bacon did have in
> > depth knowledge. The legend is purposeful and meant to demonstrate
> > that genius has a separate embodiment beyond the individual. However
> > they were most certainly not the same individual and Shakespeare
> > unlikely had anymore than fleeting knowledge. Di Vinci, on the other
> > hand, was stone cold into it.
>
> >http://niggerwise.com
>
> > On Nov 6, 9:31 am, Isparklaria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > BBDD,
>
> > > it sounds to me like you are able to write meaningfully about QBL.
> > > However, I am wondering why you are so quick to proclaim your
> > > expertise to in this discussion group. I have good reason to believe,
> > > both from experience, observation and reading that when one starts to
> > > manipulate their mind with QBL and other similar tools, it is common
> > > for them to be fooled into thinking that they are far more advanced
> > > than they really are. That doesn't mean that I know that you are a
> > > mere dabbler, but I will not be easily convinced that you are possible
> > > expert like Newton, Shakespeare, Elias Ashmole and other great men
> > > seem to have been. I would like to give you another friendly warning
> > > that you may have heard before. Please do not take this to mean that I
> > > think that you are crazy, I don't, but as you have probably bean
> > > warned it is easy enough to mess up your mind with QBL. My advice is
> > > to proceed slowly. QBL is a powerful tool, but it is not without it's
> > > dangers and limitations.
>
> > > On Nov 6, 5:37 am, BBDD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > Centers are quite obvious and living in them is just as obvious with a
> > > > little free thought. Motive center is easily recognized. It is that
> > > > portion of mind we think in quickly enough to apply the brakes in an
> > > > emergency. Emotive center is that one which gets us in the most
> > > > trouble by causing us to act on emotion before fully considering
> > > > consequences. Cogent center is the portion of mind that does consider,
> > > > but it also "identifies" and considers far more than is essential to
> > > > any endeavor. Pneuma is that part of mind that handles conceptualizing
> > > > and dreaming ~ sometime way too heavy on the dreaming.
>
> > > > An example of living in a center would be the bookkeeper type that
> > > > lives less adventure and is unable to dare emotionally. Another would
> > > > be the athlete with an aversion to poetry and sensitivity. Our
> > > > greatest strength is in living in and balancing all centers of mind.
> > > > There is a method for doing so. The period most noted for the wide use
> > > > of such methods is the Renaissance. These methods saw another period
> > > > of popularity during the Industrial Revolution.
>
> > > >http://niggerwise.com
>
> > > > On Nov 6, 4:14 am, BBDD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Generally, centers exist in us. When we narrow our selves down and
> > > > > gain stewardship over the legions of self, we begin to exist in
> > > > > centers. This occurs as we master. The master athlete lives in motive
> > > > > center. The master thespian lives in emotive center. The master
> > > > > industrialist lives in cogent center. The master poet lives in pneuma
> > > > > center. Each lives one life per domain or center… ideally.
>
> > > > > Now, of
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Memphis Freethought Alliance" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to