tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20433842.post115232593113372638..comments2024-03-07T12:57:35.296-05:00Comments on Varieties of Unreligious Experience: Ni ansaConrad H. Rothhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01916542057749474124noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20433842.post-26946333113139460312007-01-11T06:12:00.000-05:002007-01-11T06:12:00.000-05:00I own the Kaplan edition / translation of the Sefe...I own the Kaplan edition / translation of the <em>Sefer Yetzirah</em>, which I too find inspiring. In fact it made my eyes water when I first read it.<br /><br />I'd read the Zohar too, but it's so bloody long.Conrad H. Rothhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01916542057749474124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20433842.post-65879803346194956492007-01-11T05:17:00.000-05:002007-01-11T05:17:00.000-05:00Yes, I thought that the usage of 72 was rather int...Yes, I thought that the usage of 72 was rather interesting as well, considering how frequently the same number turns up in various Biblical and post-Biblical contexts. You give a nice summary of those usages, incidentally - I'd never really considered the frequency with which they were abbreviated to 70, although I had noted the apparant incongruence between the origin of the Septuagint (acc. to the Letter of Aristeas) and the text's traditional name. Fascinating!<br /><br />You mention the esoteric nature of this work and I am reminded of a very early Hebrew grammar that is, traditionally, viewed not as a grammar at all. The text is entitled <i>Sefer Yetzirah</i>, or "Book of Formation". It is received by the tradition as a thaumaturgical work, the use of which enables one to create a golem. While some might see its true role as a (very) early grammar to be disillusioning, I find its true origin to be even more inspiring.SFHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09549983078343070107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20433842.post-1152608704409034662006-07-11T05:05:00.000-04:002006-07-11T05:05:00.000-04:00I had wondered about the significance of there hav...I had wondered about the significance of there having been seventy-two lanuages (or as many <A HREF="http://www.spamula.net/blog/2005/08/hepburns_alphabets.html" REL="nofollow">alphabets</A>), so I’m glad to see an explanation here!misteraitchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00899815714570502464noreply@blogger.com