Forum Replies Created
- Replies
Oh, and the only letter that is not “anchored” into the ground is the final “mem” which goes “full circle” and reminds me of the idea of “final” letters and “final” years bringing us to “full circle”…
Any comment about this in Kabbalah?
Affectionate shalom,
David
Dear All, hello again!
I have now a more philosophical/spiritual question about final letters. Their design very often is the manipulation of the horizontal line into a downward vertical line. It’s like “anchoring” the letter into the ground, into “reality” if you will. The “final letters” of a lifetime, that is, the last years of a person, is also about going back to the essence/fundamentals and getting ready to go back to earth. Are there any kabbalistic comments about this possible parallel?
Thank you so much for your precious time!
Kindly,
David
Dear All,
I have a simple question. The numerical values of final letters are said to be by the hundreds (like final “pe” would be 800) but then it is also said that the final “pe” is also “80”. How come?
Thank you for your help.
Kind wishes,
David
Hello everyone,
Just a short note to Gil about the letter “Reish” resembling or not “rosh”. Take the letter and just draw a dot into it. What do you see? 😉
Shalom Rav, David 🙂 שלום רב ,דוד
Seth,
My understanding is that my Chrome browser stopped supporting Vimeo, from one day to the next. I now open every Vimeo link in another browser (Firefox) and it works fine.
Thank you.
David
Dear All,
May I suggest two remarks rather than questions, relating to the concept of Makhshava. First, the difference between the creation and the way we experience it: the metaphor of music comes to my mind. For example, Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony is a book that you can have in your hand, and all of it is there, static. However, humans can only experience it through time and space, that is the time to unfold the symphony into successive sounds, and the specific space of the concert hall. Now, going from there, another remark will lead me to a trickier topic: ego/selfishness and the rest of the universe. For being a musician, I know all too well that composers like Bach, Beethoven or Mahler were deeply preoccupied by Nature, Spirituality and the Other. They worked all their lives in order to get ever so close to this Higher level of Reality. Yet, they did not do that by connecting to others in a “classic” way, they rather kept away from people in order to develop that higher degree of closeness. Once they got there—that is, when they achieved their master pieces—they were all too happy to share it with people, in the hope that their struggle could help others. So, in a way, they were connecting to the rest of the universe in their own and singular way. What then appears to be “ego” deserves further investigation, as there is more to that concept that meets the eye. There were my two cents.
All the best,
David
