06-04-2013, 12:18 AM
Have you ever noticed the English translation of Matthew Chapter 7 seems to lack segways? The text goes from ?do not judge? to ?don?t give a holy thing to dogs? to ?seek and you will find?.... In my opinion, some of the segways are difficult to find in English, but in the original Aramaic there are wordplays that retain segways beautifully. Let?s take some examples?
Matthew 7:1-5 starts us off with a theme, ?beware judging or admonishing your brother?. But then in Matthew 7:6, the passage changes topic to ?don?t give a holy thing to dogs or pearls to swine?. Where is the segway? Well, let?s start with the Aramaic root word ?mrgnita? (translated ?pearls?) in Matthew 7:6. Do you see a play on the Aramaic word ?mrtinota?, meaning ?instruction? -- if so, then through wordplay we can find a segway ? the ?pearls? in Matthew 7:6 are admonishments/instructions, which was the precise topic from the previous verse in Matthew 7:5 (admonishing your brother).
Second, see the Aramaic word for ?pig? (Khzyra) in Matthew 7:6, and consider its wordplay with ?sight? (Khzya). The wordplay becomes logical because it is an additional segway from Matthew 7:5 (discussing the sight of your brother, the speck in his eye) to Matthew 7:6 (discussing the pig trampling pearls).
Third, in Matthew 7:2 to Matthew 7:3 there was yet another hidden segway in Aramaic. In Matthew 7:2, we are instructed to beware judging lest we be judged, and in Matthew 7:3 we read, ?why do you see the straw in the eye of your brother and you do not observe the beam in your eye?? For the segway, notice the Aramaic word for ?beam? (qryTha) in Matthew 7:3 can also be translated as ?field?. It is this alternate translation that leads us to a wordplay segway because this first Aramaic word (qryTha) is explicitly contrasted in Matthew 7:3 with the second Aramaic word ?gla?, which can be translated as ?wave? or alternatively ?straw?. So both alternative-word-translation-pairs work logically: 1. small straw in a large field, or 2. small wave in a large beam. Awesome evidence of wordplay!
Now to describe the beautiful segway here -- it takes careful observation in a laboratory to see small/subtle waves that create the beams (collection of cascading waves) of our reality. And even then, we can only see 'parts' of those waves (why do you see the ?speck?, as Yahshua said). Matthew 7:3 is about observation of waves (gla), and we know from physics that an observer?s focus on a wave creates that observer?s reality/perception. So the gospel of Matthew provides us with a scientific clue that explains the nature of judgment, the very focus of the passage! See e.g., The two slit experiment.
That is why if we focus on the word ?wave? (gla) we can see the mathematical segway from Matthew 7:2 (?For with the judgment that you judge, you will be judged and by the measure that you measure, it will be measured to you?) to Matthew 7:3 (?why do you see the wave in the eye of your brother, and you do not observe the beam in your own eye??)
Then at the end of this passage about judgment, in Matthew 7:5 Yahshua exclaims, ?hypocrites!? And he is right, because hypocrisy is judging faces, and not judging with discernment (depth of measurement). If we hypocrites were discerning we might see the waves intricately woven into the fabric of our brother?s heart.
Who among us is qualified to read coherently the aleph bet of the heart, for example, complete with its electromagnetic tetrahedron muscle structure interacting with exponentially complex phosphene patterns in the dynamically parallel-processing brain? Want to learn more about the physical connection between Hebrew and your heart and brain ? here?s one rabbit hole of information (some useful some scattered and blasphemous), Alphabet of the Heart, by Dan Winter showing how your heart speaks Hebrew electromagnetically, and Introduction to Hebrew and the Torus?
Yahshua can read hearts -- see Revelation 2:23, a skill that our father YHVH also uses per Jeremiah 17:10. What a blessing I hope it will be for the chosen who gain entrance to Yahshua?s classrooms in the future!
So, to be discerning here on earth, we must remove the sea of waves (forming a beam) clouding our own vision. In Matthew 7:6, Yahshua provides a parable for the wrong kind of vision (as explained above), because the Aramaic words for ?vision? and ?pig? are a wordplay on one another. Here is my interpretation: if you don?t want to be a hypocrite, then don?t have the vision of a pig (tramples admonishments and turns on the admonisher), or the heart of dog (loyalty radiates from his stomach below his heart).
Why do I say the ?heart of a dog?? Well, that?s covered in the fourth segway in this Chapter that I?d like to post here at Peshitta.org, from Matthew 7:6 to Matthew 7:7 ? the text says, ?do not give a holy thing to a dog?. In Matthew 7:6 the Aramaic word for ?dog? (klba) is a play on the Aramaic words for ?all? (kul) and ?heart? (lba). A complete heart should not be given to a ?dog?, it should be given to you know who. Is it productive to admonish a pig to make it clean (on the hopes it won?t be insulted, on the hopes it won't turn and attack you (the opposite of turning to repentance), or is it productive to try to change the heart of a dog to make it holy? Who is holy?
So, if you are not going to give your pearls/admonishments to pigs, or your gift of a holy/heart to a dog, then where does the profit of your heart belong? As Yahshua has just advised us in this sermon on the mount (at Matthew 6:20), your treasures are safe in heaven, and that?s the segway from Matthew 7:6 to Matthew 7:7, because this is where the chapter begins to cover instructions for how to enter heaven. Whether I personally will gain entrance to heaven or not, I LOVE studying these words of the gospel, and I am very encouraged by the promises I read about justice for all and heaven for the chosen!
Now consider Matthew 7:13, where the Aramaic word ?alyza? is translated ?straight? (?enter by the straight door?). This word ?alyza? can be seen as a wordplay on ?aulzna? meaning ?tribulation?. Moreover, in this same verse (Matt 7:13), the Aramaic word ?mubla? is translated as ?leads? (?broad is the road that leads to loss and many are those who go in it?). This word ?mubla? can also be translated as ?merchandise?, ?cargo?, or ?burden?.
Accordingly, by using these alternate meanings (merchandise, cargo, burden), we see the passage can have an awesome word-play! The narrow door to life is entered by tribulation, whereas the wide road to loss is entered into by merchandise. This of course flips the world-paradigm of ?commerce as success?, where people say merchandise makes you satisfied/rich, and tribulation is supposed to make you hungry/poor. This wordplay would proclaim the opposite to be true, and indeed that may be the whole point that began this very sermon on the mount. See e.g. Matthew 5:6, ?Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for uprightness because they will be satisfied.?
Obviously the Matthew 7:13 wordplay?s logic seems counterintuitive to us Roman shoppers -- ?merchandise causes loss?? But if we experience, study, and appreciate the destruction and debt caused by unbridled commercial burden/cargo, then through experience and logic we can discover it is not counterintuitive. Even emotionally, we can feel ourselves naturally desiring balance toward charity and forgiveness and nature. Indeed, a fattened manifestation of this phenomenon (unbridled cargo/debt) can be seen through the eyes of independent research describing the ?New World Order?, where genetically-modified crops are grown to ?cure hunger?, where bombs and uranium-laced bullets are used to ?spread peace and democracy?, and so on. Examples like these are great modern hypocrisies. Imagine what Yahshua will have to say about these hypocrisies when he returns with a sword!
Matthew 7:14 continues the above wordplay. There ?mubla? is translated again as ?leads? but can be also be translated as ?burden?. (Click here to read even more on this topic). And ?alyza? is translated again as ?straight?, but again can be a wordplay for ?tribulation?. The next wordplay is really short and may not qualify as fruitful, but here it is: we see the word ?qtyn? translated as narrow (narrow door to life) may be a play on the word ?qtl?, meaning ?slaughter?. This curious wordplay would fit the ?sacrificial lamb? theme too, which is important because that would allow additional segway in the next verse of Matthew 7:15, regarding false prophets as wolves in sheep?s clothing.
When I think of wolves (in addition to thinking of my high school mascot), I think of Rome, given the myth of Rome?s origin with Romulus and Remus raised by a she-wolf:
(Fortunately my high school chose a less-wierd mascot than this one).
Here in Matthew 7:15 we are contrasting the outward (clothing like sheep) with the inward (ravaging wolves), which allows us to segway again, now to Matthew 7:16, that any outward fruit comes from inward character. A real prophet is a servant, receiving words/food authorized from the kingdom above. A false prophet is a master, preparing words/food from within that bear no fruit (have no life/future).
With that context, consider Yahshua?s example of figs and trees here -- is Matthew 7:16-17 related to John 1:50-51 where Yahshua speaks to Nathan about figs and the ascending and descending angels? The name Nathan (nThnyayl) appears to be an Aramaic wordplay for fig (ThanTha) and tree (aylna). So if these wordplays are meaningful as I?ve presented them, then the Aramaic word ?kuba? (translated ?thorns?) in Matthew 7:16 would also be a play on the word ?kukba? (translated as stars). And therefore by deduction, it would suggest that a false prophet can be one who relies on fallen angels feeding Rome. Maybe this last one is a stretch, but maybe not - in any case, I chose to focus on it and so it has become part of my reality and risk assessment.
I gather that virtually every human body falls on this planet (every wave collapses) but the goal apparently is to produce fruit that falls to earth and re-grows (like the wheat seed Yahshua described in John 12:24), rather than producing no fruit and falling into the fire (as described here in our next segway to Matthew 7:19).
Per Matthew 7:19, producing good fruit is key to salvation (i.e., having a future). Discern that Yahshua gave the examples of figs and grapes, plants which freely give their fruit to sheep among soft and inviting leaves. At my property in Copperopolis, our sheep go directly to our olives and grapes whenever they are fortunate enough to enter the gates leading to our house ? I have yet to see them go to the thorny berries first, but they will eat them, just as they routinely eat thistle outside the gates when it is all they can find in the heat of summer. Consider thorn bushes (like blackberry) that protect/horde their fruit (guard their treasure) and can cut the sheep. Perhaps there is a wolf (Roman) church that guards its treasure and is drunk from the blood of sheep it has cut? Just as the messiah said in Matthew 7:15, ?beware? (azdhru).
Matthew 7:1-5 starts us off with a theme, ?beware judging or admonishing your brother?. But then in Matthew 7:6, the passage changes topic to ?don?t give a holy thing to dogs or pearls to swine?. Where is the segway? Well, let?s start with the Aramaic root word ?mrgnita? (translated ?pearls?) in Matthew 7:6. Do you see a play on the Aramaic word ?mrtinota?, meaning ?instruction? -- if so, then through wordplay we can find a segway ? the ?pearls? in Matthew 7:6 are admonishments/instructions, which was the precise topic from the previous verse in Matthew 7:5 (admonishing your brother).
Second, see the Aramaic word for ?pig? (Khzyra) in Matthew 7:6, and consider its wordplay with ?sight? (Khzya). The wordplay becomes logical because it is an additional segway from Matthew 7:5 (discussing the sight of your brother, the speck in his eye) to Matthew 7:6 (discussing the pig trampling pearls).
Third, in Matthew 7:2 to Matthew 7:3 there was yet another hidden segway in Aramaic. In Matthew 7:2, we are instructed to beware judging lest we be judged, and in Matthew 7:3 we read, ?why do you see the straw in the eye of your brother and you do not observe the beam in your eye?? For the segway, notice the Aramaic word for ?beam? (qryTha) in Matthew 7:3 can also be translated as ?field?. It is this alternate translation that leads us to a wordplay segway because this first Aramaic word (qryTha) is explicitly contrasted in Matthew 7:3 with the second Aramaic word ?gla?, which can be translated as ?wave? or alternatively ?straw?. So both alternative-word-translation-pairs work logically: 1. small straw in a large field, or 2. small wave in a large beam. Awesome evidence of wordplay!
Now to describe the beautiful segway here -- it takes careful observation in a laboratory to see small/subtle waves that create the beams (collection of cascading waves) of our reality. And even then, we can only see 'parts' of those waves (why do you see the ?speck?, as Yahshua said). Matthew 7:3 is about observation of waves (gla), and we know from physics that an observer?s focus on a wave creates that observer?s reality/perception. So the gospel of Matthew provides us with a scientific clue that explains the nature of judgment, the very focus of the passage! See e.g., The two slit experiment.
That is why if we focus on the word ?wave? (gla) we can see the mathematical segway from Matthew 7:2 (?For with the judgment that you judge, you will be judged and by the measure that you measure, it will be measured to you?) to Matthew 7:3 (?why do you see the wave in the eye of your brother, and you do not observe the beam in your own eye??)
Then at the end of this passage about judgment, in Matthew 7:5 Yahshua exclaims, ?hypocrites!? And he is right, because hypocrisy is judging faces, and not judging with discernment (depth of measurement). If we hypocrites were discerning we might see the waves intricately woven into the fabric of our brother?s heart.
Who among us is qualified to read coherently the aleph bet of the heart, for example, complete with its electromagnetic tetrahedron muscle structure interacting with exponentially complex phosphene patterns in the dynamically parallel-processing brain? Want to learn more about the physical connection between Hebrew and your heart and brain ? here?s one rabbit hole of information (some useful some scattered and blasphemous), Alphabet of the Heart, by Dan Winter showing how your heart speaks Hebrew electromagnetically, and Introduction to Hebrew and the Torus?
Yahshua can read hearts -- see Revelation 2:23, a skill that our father YHVH also uses per Jeremiah 17:10. What a blessing I hope it will be for the chosen who gain entrance to Yahshua?s classrooms in the future!
So, to be discerning here on earth, we must remove the sea of waves (forming a beam) clouding our own vision. In Matthew 7:6, Yahshua provides a parable for the wrong kind of vision (as explained above), because the Aramaic words for ?vision? and ?pig? are a wordplay on one another. Here is my interpretation: if you don?t want to be a hypocrite, then don?t have the vision of a pig (tramples admonishments and turns on the admonisher), or the heart of dog (loyalty radiates from his stomach below his heart).
Why do I say the ?heart of a dog?? Well, that?s covered in the fourth segway in this Chapter that I?d like to post here at Peshitta.org, from Matthew 7:6 to Matthew 7:7 ? the text says, ?do not give a holy thing to a dog?. In Matthew 7:6 the Aramaic word for ?dog? (klba) is a play on the Aramaic words for ?all? (kul) and ?heart? (lba). A complete heart should not be given to a ?dog?, it should be given to you know who. Is it productive to admonish a pig to make it clean (on the hopes it won?t be insulted, on the hopes it won't turn and attack you (the opposite of turning to repentance), or is it productive to try to change the heart of a dog to make it holy? Who is holy?
So, if you are not going to give your pearls/admonishments to pigs, or your gift of a holy/heart to a dog, then where does the profit of your heart belong? As Yahshua has just advised us in this sermon on the mount (at Matthew 6:20), your treasures are safe in heaven, and that?s the segway from Matthew 7:6 to Matthew 7:7, because this is where the chapter begins to cover instructions for how to enter heaven. Whether I personally will gain entrance to heaven or not, I LOVE studying these words of the gospel, and I am very encouraged by the promises I read about justice for all and heaven for the chosen!
Now consider Matthew 7:13, where the Aramaic word ?alyza? is translated ?straight? (?enter by the straight door?). This word ?alyza? can be seen as a wordplay on ?aulzna? meaning ?tribulation?. Moreover, in this same verse (Matt 7:13), the Aramaic word ?mubla? is translated as ?leads? (?broad is the road that leads to loss and many are those who go in it?). This word ?mubla? can also be translated as ?merchandise?, ?cargo?, or ?burden?.
Accordingly, by using these alternate meanings (merchandise, cargo, burden), we see the passage can have an awesome word-play! The narrow door to life is entered by tribulation, whereas the wide road to loss is entered into by merchandise. This of course flips the world-paradigm of ?commerce as success?, where people say merchandise makes you satisfied/rich, and tribulation is supposed to make you hungry/poor. This wordplay would proclaim the opposite to be true, and indeed that may be the whole point that began this very sermon on the mount. See e.g. Matthew 5:6, ?Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for uprightness because they will be satisfied.?
Obviously the Matthew 7:13 wordplay?s logic seems counterintuitive to us Roman shoppers -- ?merchandise causes loss?? But if we experience, study, and appreciate the destruction and debt caused by unbridled commercial burden/cargo, then through experience and logic we can discover it is not counterintuitive. Even emotionally, we can feel ourselves naturally desiring balance toward charity and forgiveness and nature. Indeed, a fattened manifestation of this phenomenon (unbridled cargo/debt) can be seen through the eyes of independent research describing the ?New World Order?, where genetically-modified crops are grown to ?cure hunger?, where bombs and uranium-laced bullets are used to ?spread peace and democracy?, and so on. Examples like these are great modern hypocrisies. Imagine what Yahshua will have to say about these hypocrisies when he returns with a sword!
Matthew 7:14 continues the above wordplay. There ?mubla? is translated again as ?leads? but can be also be translated as ?burden?. (Click here to read even more on this topic). And ?alyza? is translated again as ?straight?, but again can be a wordplay for ?tribulation?. The next wordplay is really short and may not qualify as fruitful, but here it is: we see the word ?qtyn? translated as narrow (narrow door to life) may be a play on the word ?qtl?, meaning ?slaughter?. This curious wordplay would fit the ?sacrificial lamb? theme too, which is important because that would allow additional segway in the next verse of Matthew 7:15, regarding false prophets as wolves in sheep?s clothing.
When I think of wolves (in addition to thinking of my high school mascot), I think of Rome, given the myth of Rome?s origin with Romulus and Remus raised by a she-wolf:
(Fortunately my high school chose a less-wierd mascot than this one).
Here in Matthew 7:15 we are contrasting the outward (clothing like sheep) with the inward (ravaging wolves), which allows us to segway again, now to Matthew 7:16, that any outward fruit comes from inward character. A real prophet is a servant, receiving words/food authorized from the kingdom above. A false prophet is a master, preparing words/food from within that bear no fruit (have no life/future).
With that context, consider Yahshua?s example of figs and trees here -- is Matthew 7:16-17 related to John 1:50-51 where Yahshua speaks to Nathan about figs and the ascending and descending angels? The name Nathan (nThnyayl) appears to be an Aramaic wordplay for fig (ThanTha) and tree (aylna). So if these wordplays are meaningful as I?ve presented them, then the Aramaic word ?kuba? (translated ?thorns?) in Matthew 7:16 would also be a play on the word ?kukba? (translated as stars). And therefore by deduction, it would suggest that a false prophet can be one who relies on fallen angels feeding Rome. Maybe this last one is a stretch, but maybe not - in any case, I chose to focus on it and so it has become part of my reality and risk assessment.
I gather that virtually every human body falls on this planet (every wave collapses) but the goal apparently is to produce fruit that falls to earth and re-grows (like the wheat seed Yahshua described in John 12:24), rather than producing no fruit and falling into the fire (as described here in our next segway to Matthew 7:19).
Per Matthew 7:19, producing good fruit is key to salvation (i.e., having a future). Discern that Yahshua gave the examples of figs and grapes, plants which freely give their fruit to sheep among soft and inviting leaves. At my property in Copperopolis, our sheep go directly to our olives and grapes whenever they are fortunate enough to enter the gates leading to our house ? I have yet to see them go to the thorny berries first, but they will eat them, just as they routinely eat thistle outside the gates when it is all they can find in the heat of summer. Consider thorn bushes (like blackberry) that protect/horde their fruit (guard their treasure) and can cut the sheep. Perhaps there is a wolf (Roman) church that guards its treasure and is drunk from the blood of sheep it has cut? Just as the messiah said in Matthew 7:15, ?beware? (azdhru).