On Nov 6, 11:33 am, BBDD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > reading that perv, Crowley, does.
In what way do you consider Crowley a pervert? I am not saying that he was or wasn't; I am just curious to find out what you made this statement. On Nov 6, 11:33 am, BBDD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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 > > ... > > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
