kwaw said:
SY 1:7
Ten Sephiroth of nothingness
their end is in their beginning
and their beginning in their end
like a flame in a burning coal
for the master is singular
He has no second
And before one, what do you count?
[sy trans. Aryeh Kaplan]
Thanks.
Do you see any note about the letter shin in this context? Why didn't the author of SY seize the opportunity to use "burning coal" in relation to the letter shin?
From the Zohar:
"If one wishes to know the widsom of the holy unification, let him look at the flame rising from a burning coal or from a kindled lamp. The flame cannot rise unless it is unified with something physical."
Is shin mentioned?
Huck said:
I agree, that the ToL-model of later times was not in the SY. The Zohar is given to late 13th century, so not very relevant. ?
??? Not sure what is 'not very relevant' here'. The SY, the ToL, the Zohar?
**** The Sohar is not especially relevant for questions "before 800 AD", what was talked of.
snip
QUOTE]
Letter-interpretation of course preceded the Lurianists, but specific attributions and reflections, which only could exist, when the letter has reached a specific form, surely should be given to a later time than the change of the letter-outfit.?[/QUOTE]
What do you mean by 'change of letter outfit' that has 'raeached a spcific form?' Even given your disputable 800 AD date we have 4/5 hundred years for the beginning of the kabbalistic theosophic redactions and 6/7 hundred years before the beginning of the Tarot. The discussion from my point of view in any case is not to prove a correspondence between the letters and atu from origin, but merely a look at the symbolism of the letters and secondly how this may correspond to the iconography of the Atu. I make no claim as to their being originally connected at beginning of the Tarot, nonetheless the association was made at some point in the history of tarot and has continued and influenced the design and occult import ever since. Historical evidence suggests post Gebelin, I suspect earlier but that is not the discussion.
As for letter forms, Jewish tradition says the present form was established by Ezra in the 4th century bc, and the forms of the letters in the Qumran texts [circa 3rd-1st century bc] do not contradict that. Nonetheless variations, such as those of shin and tau [formerly a cross shape] were well known about in the middle ages and incorporated into kabalistic symbolism. The facts of the origins of the alphabetical script, which may or may not have been known about, do not detract from the symbolism. In fact the symbolism frequently incorporates details that reflect origins that in the middle age were largely unknown about, and thus testify to the antiquity of the symbolism..?
**** We have talked specifically about shin and the variations of its form, which can be proven by appearances in various transmitted texts.
QUOTE]
Aleph and Tau as first and last letter of course had a real old letter-symbolism, for instance as Urim and Tunnim.
But that parts of letter symbolism are really old doesn't touch the problem to discriminate, which part of the letter symbolism theories developed at which time correlating to specific conditions.
Only by this something like the "true view" develops, which should have the condition to be not ideological determined..?[/QUOTE]
But the letter symbolism is ideologically determined, by judaic-christian theology, gnosticism, neo-platonism, stoic atomism, zuvanism and who knows how many other 'isms, known and unknown. How can you develop a 'true view' [whatever that is] of the symbolism without reference to the ideology, theology or philosophy that determines it? I don't understand your point or, whatever it maybe, its relevance to what I have posted.
**** I talked about the view of the "master of the alphabet", a literaric expression of myself for the inventor of the alphabet and his specific problem to teach some humble persons reading and writing.
As far I remember you talked at the begin about shin in a global manner without specifying that you are talking about visions of shin of lurianic kabbalists of 16th or 17th century AD.
I added, that the master of the alphabet would smile about that or - at least - would be rather astonished, what could have happened to his innocent signs.
QUOTE]
As far I remember ... the tephillin are described somewhere in the Pentateuch, right?
Surely there is nothing noted, that it refers to the shin letter, but probably there is another reason for the form mentioned ... or forgotten. The text is at least from a time, when the idea "coal with 3 flames" would have been a little surprizing as the common letter shin looked rather different. [/QUOTE]
No it wouldn't have looked different, I am talking about kabbalistic symbolism as developed or noted in texts between the 13th and 17th centuries [and earlier in terms of the attributions of the SY]. You are saying [or seem to be saying] the symbolism is irrelevant or wrong because the form of the letter in the ancient Phoneican script from which it derived is different from that on which the symbolism is based. This seems to me to be a totally erroneous and irrelevant argument.
Kwaw [/B][/QUOTE]
Hm. What is your theme? The "letter shin" or the visions from lurianic cabbalists of 16th and 17th century about "their" letter shin?