|
Post by sid on Jun 29, 2006 12:16:07 GMT
Greetings Russel, Interestingly the semi-circle in the hieroglyph for sirius means "loaf" as in a loaf of (shew) bread Cheers Russell If you remember in the Chymical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreuz, the globe was mentioned in some detail. 7 rooms (semi-circle = 180°) within a circle/rotund were also mentioned i.e., 7 x 180 = 1260
|
|
ruffashlar
Member
Lodge Milncroft No. 1515 (GLoS), Govanhill Royal Arch Chapter 523 (S.G.R.A.C.S.)
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by ruffashlar on Jun 29, 2006 13:05:42 GMT
Interestingly the semi-circle in the hieroglyph for sirius means "loaf" as in a loaf of (shew) bread
The loaf hieroglyph is simply the feminine termination -t (usually silent in speech), the whole being artificially pronounced Sepedet, or Sopdet. The vowel o (Omicron) is attested by the Greek version Sothis. The narrow triangle is the hieroglyph for "sharp", Sopdet meaning the sharp or bright one.
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Jun 29, 2006 22:22:26 GMT
>The loaf hieroglyph is simply the feminine termination -t
And here was I thinking that egyptian hieroglyphics have esoteric as well as exoteric meanings
I want my money back
Cheers
Russell
|
|
ruffashlar
Member
Lodge Milncroft No. 1515 (GLoS), Govanhill Royal Arch Chapter 523 (S.G.R.A.C.S.)
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by ruffashlar on Jun 29, 2006 23:28:01 GMT
And here was I thinking that egyptian hieroglyphics have esoteric as well as exoteric meaningsEveryone from Athanasius Kircher onward. Oh wait, it stops at Champollion. Pah! What did he know? The hieroglyphs are rich in interpretative meanings, abounding in puns and visual jokes. So in that sense, their meanings are quite esoteric. Just not the meanings you insist on giving them.
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Jun 30, 2006 3:52:55 GMT
All of this already is in the public domain. I'm no expert but I can read Hebrew. Here 'tis again: 1) Ein Sof 2) Keter 3) Chokmah 4) Binah 5) Chesed 6) Gevurah 7) Tiferet 8) Netzakh 9) Hod 10) Yesod 11) Malkuth Caution: the above numbers do not correspond with their sephirot. To lable each element, I needed to give each a number. I suppose I should have given Ein Sof a "0" (Pike would certainly have approved) but it did not occur to me until after I did it. This image is clearer, the letters easier to read: I perceive this group to be further advanced than am I. However, if anyone would like to get into a discussion about the individual sefirot, that would be very cool with me.
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Jun 30, 2006 8:08:09 GMT
>All of this already is in the public domain
Karen
You might like to re-read the thread
Cheers
Russell
|
|
jmd
Member
fourhares.com
Posts: 1,081
|
Post by jmd on Jun 30, 2006 10:48:55 GMT
Speaking for myself only, Karen (imakegarb), you have a distinct advantage, in that my knowledge of Hebrew is so limited as to be deemed near to non-existent. In fact, my only Hebrew comes from the various words I have picked up from numerous texts in mainly English that, of necessity, include Hebrew terms (especially in relation to Kabalah), and from occasional play with a Hebrew-English dictionary (wouldn't my Rabbi great-grandfather, o.b.m, be appalled!) Any study of the Sefirot will of course also reflect our own preferred orientations, whether these be psychological, traditional, or other - but still, it would be nice to have threads that discusses each separately.
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Jun 30, 2006 12:28:03 GMT
Slightly off the subject, I recall a jewish Mason trying to teach me kabbalah. He explained that he used the letter kaph www.bible-researcher.com/hebrew/kaph.gif when he had kidney problems. He considered that that letter improved his kidneys because of its kidney shape. I dropped out of his classes because he did not teach rising on the planes. Perhaps he could not or perhaps he preferred to be speculative. Cheers Russell
|
|
|
Post by atarnaris on Jun 30, 2006 13:03:28 GMT
>As we can not visualise your picture could you give us the names of the cities that fit in the 10 Sephiroth so we search for them in maps... Andrew I have given several clues in this thread and I am uncomfortable with giving any more in the public domain Cheers Russell Russell, If we are to further knowledge I believe that we should share with faith and honesty. Regarding the public domain issue, do you think that the uninitiated would understand (or care) anyway? Maybe the mods might create a password-protected space as well? I am intrigued by your explanation of the TOL figure but I admit I do not understand it currently. I will try to apply this for the general geographical area of Greece. Do you advise to use current major cities, or ancient major cities, temple sites etc?
|
|
ruffashlar
Member
Lodge Milncroft No. 1515 (GLoS), Govanhill Royal Arch Chapter 523 (S.G.R.A.C.S.)
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by ruffashlar on Jun 30, 2006 16:05:20 GMT
jmd wrote: "Any study of the Sefirot will of course also reflect our own preferred orientations, whether these be psychological, traditional, or other - but still, it would be nice to have threads that discusses each separately."
That's quite a jolly idea. Would anyone like to start a thread on one Sefirah to begin with?
Where would we begin? Keter? Or Malkuth?
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Jul 1, 2006 0:35:20 GMT
>I will try to apply this for the general geographical area of Greece. Do you advise to use current major cities, or ancient major cities, temple sites etc?
Andrew
See my advice above.
If you do not have an genuine landscape entity then it will not work
I suggest you apply all my clues given earlier in this thread to the map of Australia. I have provided more than enough data to enable you to reproduce my work.
Recall that it took me 6 months of meditation to decode New Zealand (before the Tree turned over during the Queen's visit to the various sephira - about 1989). The entry into the Mysteries requires worthiness on our part and acceptance on the part of the Earth
Cheers
Russell
|
|
ruffashlar
Member
Lodge Milncroft No. 1515 (GLoS), Govanhill Royal Arch Chapter 523 (S.G.R.A.C.S.)
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by ruffashlar on Jul 1, 2006 0:47:40 GMT
Clamator glandarius
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Jul 1, 2006 3:08:47 GMT
>Clamator glandarius
Ruff
You are too modest
Cheers
Russell
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Jul 1, 2006 4:05:21 GMT
Ein Sof would be the place to start, though many also appreciate the bottom-up approach would go with Malkuth. Then again, there's much to be said for starting in the middle with Tefireth. And, yet again, Yesod being the demarcation point between the physical universe of Malkuth and the spiritual of all the above sephirot . . . Y'know, it's all good. ;D And, JMD, the fact I'm fair to midlin with Hebrew should tell you it's easy, really. Once you get past the alphabet and learning gender endings and such, the rest is vocabulary and how to figure out root meanings. But I don't insist that my teachers teach me only what I want to know. I find my teachers know more than me anyway
|
|
ruffashlar
Member
Lodge Milncroft No. 1515 (GLoS), Govanhill Royal Arch Chapter 523 (S.G.R.A.C.S.)
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by ruffashlar on Jul 1, 2006 4:49:40 GMT
Clamator glandarius? I'd say it described you pretty well, Russell; if perhaps a little unflatteringly - but that's Nature, innit. ;D Ein Sof would be the place to start, though many also appreciate the bottom-up approach would go with Malkuth. Then again, there's much to be said for starting in the middle with Tefireth. [ ... ] Y'know it's all goodWell, let's go with the middle. And you begin.
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Jul 1, 2006 5:27:21 GMT
>Clamator glandarius? I'd say it described you pretty well, Russell; if perhaps a little unflatteringly - but that's Nature, innit. ;D
I take it from that that you think I am an alien in the human nest
Could be true but who would believe it? And is belief of any value if we cannot test it?
Cheers
Russell
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Jul 1, 2006 7:45:48 GMT
Tiferet (beauty), aka Rakhamim (compassion/mercy). This is the great reconciler of the so-called opposites among the sephirot; between Chokmah and Binah, Hesed and Geburah, Netzach and Hod. Just as an illustration, let's consider the reconciliation between Chesed and Geburah. Chesed would say "Give". Geburah would say "No one deserves it." Tiferet would say, "Yes, Geburah is right, no one really 'deserves' it but show mercy and give anyway."
What this means is Tiferet, in this example, acts as a blend between Chesed and Geburah but shows a definate bias toward Chesed, the right-handed sephirot.
But a caution here, Tiferet is not about compromise. Instead, Tiferet is about, harmonizing, balancing, unifying the two "sides" in such a way that everything is where and how it should be. It is for this reason that Tiferet is a "beauty" that integrates those elements it can and plays one off the other where it must. It doesn't take black and white and come up with grey. Instead, it takes back and white and developes depth.
K, Russell. Tiferet has a direct feed into Yesod. I say YOU take that next. ;D
|
|
|
Post by middlepillar on Jul 1, 2006 8:32:51 GMT
In my limited experience, I have always been taught that you should start with Malkuth or even just below (In preparatory state).
But you've started now!
|
|
|
Post by atarnaris on Jul 1, 2006 11:34:47 GMT
& If you do not have an genuine landscape entity then it will not work Russell, If your theory is correct then it cannot work confined only to a geographical area. If the TOL according to your theory manifested as a philosophical figure because of its visible emanation on earth then it means it should apply to all regions. And especially in the eastern Meditterenean where we postulate it first arose. Otherwise why would the people come up with a system which is not visible there? And even if they could see it elsewhere (eg Australia) why bother if it is not everywhere? It would be important only if it is a pattern visible everywhere. Do you not agree?
|
|
|
Post by atarnaris on Jul 1, 2006 11:43:02 GMT
May I invite the rest not to stray away in this thread and try to work with Russell's theory until we fully explore it and reach a conclusion?
At the end of the day this is a theory that gives a rational explanation as to why the figure of the TOL is as such...
Let's not repeat as parrots what other have said but try to employ our logic and individuality for once to solve the great problems.
If you wish to explore the history of the tree of life more maybe new threads should be started?
|
|