Remember that Harold Bloom book titled Genius: A Mosaic of One Hundred Exemplary Creative Minds that is structured kabbalistically?

You’ll notice that the Yahwist is there, and high up there. The Yahwist is the name he gives to the writer of the Torah. Any conspicuous omissions you detect?

The sages who put together the Talmud, the Zohar, Luria, etc. etc.? And despite the fact that he structured the book kabbalistically!

Bloom was an avid reader of Scholem and Idel so you can’t write these omissions off as ignorance.

So Socrates and the Socratic Kierkegaard made the list, and the Yahwist, and no “Yahwistics”? If you’re going to rangordnung the Yahwist above Shakespeare then it seems natural that you’d have Yahwistics on the list. Don’t even point out Kafka’s presence on there, that’s a weak excuse. You’d have to assume that the Yahwistics are a sort of “hidden God” that is at the place of the Ein Soph in this book of his.

Wait a second–no Jacob Frank?? And yet, Bloom is a total Frankist. I might just call him “swine” but “Frankist” is more polite. Suspicious. What about the “anxiety of influence”, he coined that concept didn’t he.

Sorry if it upsets you that I have an impartial desire to “know the canon”. That grinds people’s gears for some reason?

“Maybe Bloom just thought that Vital wasn’t that great?” Give me a break, we all know Jews are conspicuously intelligent. It’s extremely suspicious that their canon is largely inaccessible to us. How much of a dumb goy do you have to be? Please put a dunce cap over the diaper on your head, because you need to look the way you act.

I’m excited for that Tishby/Luzzatto book to arrive in the mail, I want to know what that’s about. It’s interesting that a handful of their main “founders” lived around the same time as the American founders.

Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
Jacob Frank (1726-1791)

And which one is more influential? I’m going to have to go with the one they call the “first Jewish hippie”.

How about the one Hodos calls the “first Jewish fascist”, Schneur Zalman of Liadi (1745-1812)? How about the “first American democrat” Andrew Jackson (1767-1845)? Who owns this anyway, Jewish fascists would you say?

People are just really touchy about all this for some reason

Have you ever even seen this man’s face before? This is Luria. He lived a generation after Machiavelli

You have to think like a Machiavellian to even have these thoughts. Or is it more appropriate to say think like a Lurian?

Luria himself said his teachings should be kept secret because the impure shells would rise up against him. I think I read that it wasn’t until 1850 that his foremost student, Chaim Vital’s, writings were printed, so 230 years after the latter’s death. Before that it was manuscripts, “one in a town, two in a clan”. Something poetic about that. This mirrors that Bloom book’s structure above- the hidden “Ein Soph”, rabbis percolating it down in “garments” as they call them for the Jewish rabble. You can even see that phenomenon in Idel’s work.

I’m so sorry that a certain people didn’t get FINE PURPLE SILK PYJAMAS in their cells, is that really going to prevent you from thinking clearly about all this?

All kinds of ways to depict this

This is still my favorite one

Remember that 2002 dissertation from the other day that cites the TWO only existing scholarly works on Lurianism?

At shekina.mybb they quote from one of those works

Just some idle chitchat we’re having here huh?

If you don’t care to know about any of this you truly are a nigger. Or NPC if you’d prefer. OR if you really want to get to the heart of the matter- you’re someone whose holiness has already been extracted from them. “Nations” are abstractions, nations are made of individual people, let us not forget. Wrung like a sponge, probably before you were even a teenager.

Close to 500 years since Luria lived. It’s pretty easy to get away with that sort of grand-scale “extraction” when you have a secret tradition for that many generations. And from what I can gather, Luria is just the “sequel” to the Talmud, so it goes back even longer than that. You’re a hollow shell, “easy peasy”. Oy vey, I’m so sad your country is niggerized, dear goy, would you like us to print more money to make it better? How about some more depraved cartoons for your children? Want us to turn the dial higher on the dumpsterslutification? Anything to make you happy, we got it all in ZOG.

I’ll be reading your books, even if all the idiots around me don’t understand anything I do

One thought on “

  1. Bloom’s use of kabbalistic structure reminds me that Rosen’s chapter titled “The Good” in Nihilism has seven subsections while the other chapters have only five, with only one exception which has six if I remember correctly. Don’t think that was coincidental.


Leave a Reply to reggedieh Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: