leonardcohenforum.com

Mouth closed, long and slow and deep, no gasping 'allowed' or ... You're right, Tom; and Leonard, too, way back when... did Phil also keep all the doors and windows shut tight?


~ Lizzy

Hi All-(hope this includes Doron).

This is one last post before Anne & I are "burning up the road, and heading down to Phoenix"-though, we are probably more burning up the air since we are flying (and that does have a direct impact on our experience!).

But to reach that authentic will, our little will has to undergo a lot of battering.
And it's not appropriate that our little will should be destroyed too often
because we need it to interact with all the other little wills

-Leonard Cohen

After all the unfortunate bad vibes that have been dispensed, I pray-since it is a book of prayer-that the text be understood by the open-hearted many, rather than the broken-hearted few.

And here, in my own, Confiteur Deo, to Jack who has seemed to be driving me nuts with the volume of his "tangential" thoughts, I say:

Jack, you were right, (partially) this business is about land. It is specifically about the covenant with Abram, that states:

that day God made a covenant with Abram, saying:
To thy seed will I give this land, from the river
of Egypt even to the great river Euphrates.

And our friend, Simon, gives us some more information about Zionism and its influence on A. M. Klein and hopefully on Leonard, also.

Whereas Spinoza presents the theoretical grounding for man as defender and preserver
of the divine force in humanity, the Zionist struggle to reassert human dignity
embodies the hope of victory of humanism over tyranny.
The Zionist ideal of the return to the land reconfirms the pantheistic notion
of man's indelible affinity with nature and the divine.
In the reality of the emerging totalitarian regimes, Jewish freedom
to cultivate the ancestral land counteracts the threat of man's
dehumanization; in that sense, Jewish national rebirth becomes
the emblem of humanity's moral rebirth.

All of this, of course, echoes within the context of Abraham's two son's, Ishmael and Issac.

We've known from our readings for quite some time, that the text of BoM involves both exile and an un-stated recognition of the Holocaust. It really didn't strike me until I heard the readings at church this past Sunday that the sacrifice of Abraham & Issac was a holocaust and that the covenant involved the land around Abraham and the agreement was sealed with the procedure of circumcism.

Here from Genesis:

Isaac said to his father: My father. And he answered: What wilt thou, son?
Behold, saith he, fire and wood: where is the victim for the holocaust?

And Abraham said: God will provide himself a victim for an holocaust, my son.
So they went on together.

Abraham undergoes circumcism at 99 and has Ishmael undergo it at 13. All of this brings to mind a story that my sister sent me recently about a preacher and a bear. I won't bore you with the whole story, but will provide the punchline from the rabbi, "Maybe, I shouldn't have started off with the circumcism."

And, how could exile not involve land? The Zionist, Klein, nevertheless, held forth that it was imperative that the Jewish people have this land that had been given by covenant to Abraham (and through him also to the children of Ishmael) to triumph and be brother to "all that lives."

From his "Child Herold":

For thou art the world, and I am part thereof; thou
art the
blossom and I its fluttering petal.
I behold thee in all things, and in all things: lo
it is myself;
into the pupil of thine eye, it is my very countenance
I see.
...................................................
I am thy son, 0 Lord, and brother to all that lives
am I. (90-94,113)

Klein's ambivlance that Ahmar and Izak be brothers reaches its climax in this passage:

Klein's ambivalence, though, does reflect the tension between his political
awareness that Zionism, to triumph on the terms it had established,
had to militantly defend itself, and his longing to be "brother to all that lives."
"Childe Harold's Pilgrimage" concludes,

'Tis not in me to unsheathe an avenging sword;
I cannot don phylactery to pray;
Weaponless, blessed with no works, and much abhorred,
This only is mine wherewith to face the horde:
The frozen patience waiting for its day,
The stance long-suffering, the stoic word,
The bright empirics that knows well that the
Night of the cauchemar comes and goes away,--
A baleful wind, a baneful nebula, over
A saecular imperturbability. (163-72)

Blessed be the teacher of my heart, on his throne of patience. Blessed are you who circled desire with a blade, and the garden with fiery swords, and heaven and earth with a word. Who, in the terrible inferno, sheltered understanding, and keeps her still, beautiful and deeply concealed. Blessed are you who sweetens the longing between us. Blessed are you who binds the arm to the heart, and the will to the will. Who has written a name on a gate, that she might find it, and come into my room. Who defends a heart with strangerhood. Blessed are you who sealed a house with weeping. Blessed be Ishmael for all time, who covered his face with the wilderness, and came to you in darkness. Blessed be the covenant of love between what is hidden and what is revealed. I was like one who had never been caressed, when you touched me from a place in your name, and dressed the wound of ignorance with mercy. Blessed is the covenant of love, the covenant of mercy, useless light behind the terror, deathless song in the house of night.

What strikes me now, are the tensions that this sets up. In the terrible inferno of the Holocaust, there is beauty that is covered and concealed. Those who suffered carefully share in the covenant of love-not simply land, and the wounds of ignorance are dressed with mercy.

Here, in this deathless song, in the house of night. Where, Leonard writes:

It goes all the way from thinking that nothing any of us do is terribly important
to feeling that every person has a divine spark and is here to fulfil a special mission.

As Pound wrote of Whitman, "Let there be commerce between us."

Joe

DB, my previous posting was a shocker. Completely out of order and a big disappointment to me. Disappointing in that it was offensive to you and no doubt, to many others.
No excuses. Sometimes I am an inconsiderate, self-centred eff-wit.

It would be a shame if you left the forum because of my stupidity.
This forum is much richer for your input.

Matj

lazariuk wrote:What is it that he is being very careful about?

I read the chapter dedicated to BoM in Rawlins/Dorman's book, and they are sure he's careful about Arabs, noting that he directly adresses them thru Ishmael, father of their nation. I think that many of you already mentioned that, and particularky Simon and Joe, with reminding us on dichotomy Isaac/Ishmael, where Isaac = Jews (Palestinian Jews) and Ishmael = Arabs (Palestinian Arabs).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishmael
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_view_of_Ishmael

Of course, as me being an ignorant about those traditions, the note about Ishmael was needed, more than for Isaac (what probably shows that Jewish tradition is, via Christianity and Bible, in common grounds of Western civilisation, as I would know the story of Isaac when his name is mentioned in literature).

Also, Arabs are usually connected, in popular imaginaiton, with "covering their heads" (particularly women) so this seemed like logical connection, that Ishmael learned his people how to cover their heads.

Well, dang it, Joe... in the very lines where you've focused on the unfortunate bad vibes that have been dispensed here, with:

After all the unfortunate bad vibes that have been dispensed, I pray-since it is a book of prayer-that the text be understood by the open-hearted many, rather than the broken-hearted few.

... you opportune to comment what seems to be a bit more of bad vibe in the gratuitous lead-in to telling Jack that he is (partially) right about something, with:

And here, in my own, Confiteur Deo, to Jack who has seemed to be driving me nuts with the volume of his "tangential" thoughts, I say:

... the purpose for which I can't pretend to understand at all . I do notice that you use the word seem in the first place; and in its past tense, in the second place... is this to say that he hasn't really been driving you nuts, even though you used to think he was? I want to include, Joe, that from all I've seen, it's not really like you to point out whatever your frustrations might be with someone's postings, so this really stood out for me.

Here, in this deathless song, in the house of night. Where, Leonard writes:

Quote:
It goes all the way from thinking that nothing any of us do is terribly important
to feeling that every person has a divine spark and is here to fulfil a special mission.

With this, I want to reiterate that what I see as Jack's own divine spark, and what some consider to be his purely "tangential" comments and offerings, as being integral to his own special mission, and that I appreciate reading what he contributes to this section. I posture that there is more divine and more sparks, for noticing, if one suspends judgement and merely reads with openness what he writes.

Now! I mega-hope that Doron returns to participation here. I cannot underscore that enough! I was very glad to see Mat's comments to him and others here.


~ Lizzy

Everybody play nice. Or Auntie Lizzie will opportune to comment.


YdF

oops

Blah blah blah.

Is all this drossy squabbling because we're done with I.14 and have nothing better to talk about?
Leonard can be a mystic all he wants, but some of us aren't, and that doesn't mean we can't all take a different message. Leonard has his own interpretations, but I know that when I write something, I don't always know what I've written until a friend (or even some jerk) tells me what they get from it. My guess is that Leonard would allow for or at least be entertained by alternate interpretations of his work as well. Synthesis: We're all right.

Has everyone spoken? (everyone who wants)
When is I.15 coming?

I agree with your synopsis, Manna... all of it, including Leonard's potentially being entertained at times.

Dear Joe ~ I keep wanting to rephrase my comment to you [but only just now got back to my computer]. I think it's the word "gratuitous" that concerns me... maybe "a throwaway comment" would work better? Maybe not. My point is that I don't want to seem to be ridiculing you in the process, either... so, if we can smidgeon a little to the left... and then smidgeon a little to the right... I think we may have it closer to precise. I'm just not sure what the best word[s] would be ... and now I'm exhausted, so can't spend more time trying to figure it out; however, I'm trying to phrase my questioning in the kindliest of my confusion.

May you and Anne travel and arrive safely!!!

Now, I'm waiting to see when Doron may return... he's pretty much the 'backbone' of this discussion, along with BoHo [despite the lesser number of postings by her, their content more than makes up for it]. Then, there are some really close and very strong 'second's to these two.

As it happens, however, neither of them are participating at the moment . I hope someone will run into them soon... and point the way back here. I hope we'll carry on soon. I.15 is a great idea!


Love,
Lizzy

Mat,
I appreciate your clearing things up. Your former posting was indeed a “shocker”, but your willingness to acknowledge that in the open is of great value. I cannot but respond, and hope we can still keep up this enterprise that we’ve been carrying on for several months now, with a view of continuing it all the way to the end of the book. Unfortunately, it seems difficult to maintain the friendly spirit I was hoping, perhaps naively, to be the norm on this thread, with some people unable to restrain their unfriendly asides, but I do hope we can get over those and keep our discussion alive and in a civilized fashion. There is really no room for nasty feelings here.

It seems that several of our regular contributors are very busy these days with other tasks (myself included), so the pace may be even slower from now on, but there is no rush. If somebody is willing to introduce I.15, please do; if not, I’ll do it later on.

Thanks to Tom for his sound advice to breath some fresh air. Thanks, Joe, for a wonderful, thoughtful, contribution. And thank you, Lizzy, for everything.

It's sublime to see you back, Doron . Looking forward to the continuation here .


Love,
Lizzy

DBCohen wrote:If somebody is willing to introduce I.15, please do;

Hello.
I just stopped by to introduce 1.15.

~greg




(I haven't the foggiest idea what's going on here.
Which is absolutely no criticism of anything.
And I really do intend to read all these threads, someday.

In fact the truth is that I have been from time to time
working on a script to automatically download whole threads,
and combine them into a single html page, so that I can just
scroll through them and not have to click from page to page.
The scrip automatically adds lots of internal links and
summaries and (will later add) concordances and stuff like that.
As a matter of fact the real reason that I asked earlier that this
BOM thread be split up is because my single page version
of it was approaching a gigabyte!
(If anyone is curious what they look like, this
was it, up to pg 31...
http://relay.twoshakesofalambstail.com/BOM/thread.html

but be warned, - that is a 2 meg page,
and with the pictures it's closer to 6 meg,
so it takes as long to download as a fat .mpg file.
(Here's a zip of the folder, about 2meg:
http://relay.twoshakesofalambstail.com/BOM/BOM.zip )

It's more fun to make scripts like that than to actually
use the reports.
But if everybody seriously wants to re-organize this mass,
then it would be trivial to do it, provide everybody is willing
to go back to their posts and edit them to include the
poem numbers of the (one or more) poem(s)
which each particular paragraph is most relevantly about,
using, say, "0" for the paragraphs that aren't specifically
about one poem but more generally relevant,
and also, say, -1,-2,... etc --- to mark the insults and flames
that aren't particularly relevant to anything.
(--- I don't know if there's any of that going on here.
... but just if there is. )

Then it would take a very simple script
to produce any kind of report you like.
~~

I suppose this kind of man-handling of text
is like a child playing with the needles and bed-pans
and other hospital paraphernalia that occasionally
washes up on the shore.

Again, I definitely don't mean this as criticism.
But I am reminded in scanning through these posts
of something from long ago in my life.

Partly because I had never experienced such a thing
before and had no idea that such things could be.
Partly because the reciter was very good,
(and I was reminded of him, later, by Richard Burton.)
Partly because the poem is good.
And partly because I was at an age (about 10)
when I was ready for it.
It was my very first impression of the power that
recited poetry could be. And the poem effectively
named, and, I thought, justified certain of my reactions
to organized school, vs other ways of learning.
But whatever.
I never forgot the experience.

The poem was this:

from Leaves of Grass - Walt Whitman
---------------------------------------------------
WHEN I heard the learn'd astronomer;
When the proofs, the figures, were ranged in columns before me;
When I was shown the charts and the diagrams, to add, divide, and measure them;
When I, sitting, heard the astronomer, where he lectured with much applause in the lecture-room,
How soon, unaccountable, I became tired and sick;
Till rising and gliding out, I wander'd off by myself,
In the mystical moist night-air, and from time to time,
Look'd up in perfect silence at the stars.

Hi Greg ~

Well, now, if this thread needed some levity, this was surely it .

I suppose this kind of man-handling of text
is like a child playing with the needles and bed-pans
and other hospital paraphernalia that occasionally
washes up on the shore.

A laugh-out-loud moment for me.


Now... were you introducing I.15 to someone off-screen with "Pleased to meet you"s all round... or will you be doing this here in your NEXT posting?


Greg wrote:

Quote:
from Leaves of Grass - Walt Whitman
---------------------------------------------------
WHEN I heard the learn'd astronomer;
When the proofs, the figures, were ranged in columns before me;
When I was shown the charts and the diagrams, to add, divide, and measure them;
When I, sitting, heard the astronomer, where he lectured with much applause in the lecture-room,
How soon, unaccountable, I became tired and sick;
Till rising and gliding out, I wander'd off by myself,
In the mystical moist night-air, and from time to time,
Look'd up in perfect silence at the stars.

Meanwhile, this makes an excellent and lovely point, one which I fully understand... yet, I still long to hear of the historical nuts and bolts of these verses that I would not know of, otherwise.

So, if you opt to not rise to the challenge of this on-screen introduction of I.15, I hope someone will .


~ Lizzy

Joe Way wrote:Jack, you were right, (partially) this business is about land. It is specifically about the covenant with Abram, that states:

that day God made a covenant with Abram, saying:
To thy seed will I give this land, from the river
of Egypt even to the great river Euphrates.

Oh Partially right? Which part should I have left out of my trinity? the people who are on the land or the repentence?
In quoting God maybe it would serve to mention that He did point out clearly that they were to occupy a land where they were once strangers. I thought about that when I realized how much I knew, how much everyone seems to know, about the Jewish tradition and how little we know about Arab tradition. Not only do we know who Moses is but we know who played him in the movie and who directed him.

lizzytysh wrote:With this, I want to reiterate that what I see as Jack's own divine spark, and what some consider to be his purely "tangential" comments and offerings, as being integral to his own special mission, and that I appreciate reading what he contributes to this section. I posture that there is more divine and more sparks, for noticing, if one suspends judgement and merely reads with openness what he writes.

This is such a beautiful paragraph that I think that everyone should memorize it. Then they can use it over and over again and subsitute Jack for any name they wish.

The problem with that is that it was written because of a bit of a judgement you had of Joe.
I like what Joe wrote and wouldn't want to see him discouraged by having him think that others feel that he is being unfair to me.

What is tangential for one person might not be tangential for another. That should be expected. I'll give you an example. For many what you wrote above might not be tangential to what BoM is about and for others it might be the whole point. You are suggesting that one should stop at least for a while their judgements and listen carefully to what another is saying. BoM starts with the words "I stopped to listen". I think that you are pointing to something that BoM is pointing to, but thats just me and it might not be true for others.
You can't stop for everything and after he wrote the book he changed "I stopped" for "being stopped". What stops you stops you and what doesn't, doesn't. We can only communicate to the extent that we can communicate and we do our best and communicate to each other and often in ways that only a limited number of people can understand. I'll give you another example. I'll tell you something that I think relevant to this prayer of this book that I think that only you will find meaningful.
The word gravity and the expression "law of attraction" mean one and the same thing. I prefer to use the word gravity for some various reasons. The page we are on deals with what gets covered, what is made a secret and he uses the word attraction in a specific way.
Without going too far I think that what I wrote will make you think that I am on to something that you feel is very meaningful to you personally and for the most part I think that for everyone else it will sound like nonsense. For your part am I right?