Yeshiva University - Masmid Yearbook (New York, NY)

Page 29 text:

M ASM ID D ' ludi tuili sibi Fr. Bacono nati ( I hese plays, en- trusted to llieinselves, proceeded from Francis Ba- con). Now, a different form of the same word is found on a private document of Bacon. I here the word is honorificabihludino which, they say, is the anagram for . . . Initio hi ludi Fr. Bacono. (In the beginning these plays are from Francis Bacon). These anagrams have a strangely coin- cidental persistence, and it is little wonder that numbers of people stake their reputation in de- fence of this theory. On page 53 of the Shakespeare Folio Comedies, the name Bacon is introduced. And to render the Bacon-Shakespeare secret apparent, the number of words on page 53 is exactly I 77 which is the simple clock or Cabbala count for William Shakes- peare. The word honorificabilitudinitatibus , re- ferred to above, is by simple clock count 287, which is in turn the sum of F. Bacon-W . Shakes- peare by the Reverse Count. The sum of Fra Rosicrosse, the designation of the Rosicrucian Brotherhood, is 157 by the simple clock count. The sum of Bacon-W. Shakespeare is also 157 by the same count and the same number of letters is found in the garbled inscription from the Tempest on the Shakespeare monument in Westminster Abbey. In my opinion, there is no more effective refu- tation of this sort of manipulation of figures and letters than the cryptogram of S. James of Leeds who, by proper arrangement of the titles of several of the plays, proves that Bernard Shaw wrote Shakespeare. Mac Beth Oth £llo Comedy of ErRors Merch of Ve Vice Coriol Inus Mids Night DReam Merry Wiv. of Dsor Meas. for MeaSure Much Adoab NWing Anth. and CI. Atra. All ' s well .... Well I Ins reduclio ml abmrdum hould ($jv p our credence in acrostics, anagram , or imagined i iphei One of the caustic critics of this theory has said, The idea of robbing the world of SI pcare for such a stiff legal-headed old jackass as Bacon i ,i modern invention of fool Any reasonable person would object to the vio- lence of this denunciation. It is unfair to the scholars who have devoted years of their life in producing evidence in support of this theory. But belief in their sincerity should in no way restrain us from rigorous criticism as to the validity of their arguments. Defamation proves nothing. Reason may convince even avowed anti-Stratfordians. Il would be beyond the scope of this discussion to present in detail the other theories of the Shakes- pearian authorship. They are built largely on surmise, and the few proofs discovered to support their contention are of a shadowy nature. The Rutland theory depends mainly on the connection between Rutland ' s report of his embassy to Den- mark in I 603, and the references to Danish habits and customs in the 1604 Quarto of Hamlet. Since Shakespeare may have read the report or spoken to Rutland, the weight of this argument is negli- gible. Two other gentlemen, the sixth Earl of Derby and the seventeenth Earl of Oxford, have been offered as candidates for this enviable post. The evidence in support of these latter two is as limited as that of the Rutland theory. And we feel impelled to conclude that the Great Un- known , proposed by some critics as the author of the works, despite all the theories, might just as well have been William Shakespeare. In the field of literature, the mysteries are legion. Did a sightless bard chant thousands of years ago the story of the siege of Troy, and was that bard Homer? Or is he the innocent bearer of a fame that belongs to many? Were the gossamers of struggle and triumph and defeat that we know as the epic cycles of the Middle Ages the product of single geniuses, or are they merely the collec- tions of the labors of a group? Did an Ossian (Continued on page 53)

Page 28 text:

Tfrentv-Four M A S M I D ' Great Lnknown who is yet to be discovered. Let us turn then to examine the evidence and weigh the arguments presented by some of these groups. We shall start with the Baconians, for they have gone farthest in the development of their thesis. Many distinguished men have taken up this theory, including Emerson, Gervinus, Disraeli, Hawthorne, Lowell, O. W. Holmes and Dickens. No other figure of the Elizabethan period com- bined so egregiously the various fields of learning manifested in the ' Shakespeare ' Works . He was all that the works required their writer to be. He was both philosopher and poet. Thus claim the Baconians. They base their contentions on three essential points. In the first place, a careful study of both authors shows that their minds coincide, that their geographical knowledge, political ideas and reli- gious sentiments were similar. Secondly, the many parallelisms between their works, the employment of similar expressions, quotations and errors indi- cates the same mind operating in both cases. Third- ly, there appear to be hidden in the Shakespeare works all sort of anagrams, cryptograms, and other concealed forms of expression which point to Fran- cis Bacon, Lord Verulam, Viscount St. Alban, Lcrd Chancellor of England as the writer of the works. As to the similarity in ideas and expression be- tween Bacon and Shakespeare, we may remain un- convinced of their identity. Two men of high and noble mind, living in the same generation, im- bibing the spirit and knowledge of their time, would inevitably show a certain similarity in their ideas and even, when discussing the same subject, a great similarity in the expression of those ideas. The hundreds of parallelisms which scholars have drawn up to prove this theory would have little validity if we remember that treatment of any given subject by two gifted men, trained in the concepts of the age, would have a certain likeness in approach, in choice of examples, and often in choice of language. The phase of proof that deals with the concealed testimony of Bacon ' s authorship, written into the works, is the most startling, the most interesting and the most precarious. From earliest times, hid- den forms of expression, known only to initiates who had gained in seme way the esoteric keys, were both a favorite pastime and a necessary vehicle for conveying information. Mystics from time immemorial have delighted in searching the Scriptures for hidden information of this sort. Sects have been founded whose secrets were recorded in well-ordered codes. The source of many of these codes has been the Cabala with its Gematria, or simple clock count, where A=l, B=2, C=3, etc., or the reverse count, where Z=1, Y=2, X=3, or the Kay count, where K= 1 0, L=11, etc. All these various methods were a part of the mystical literature for centuries before the Elizabethan Era. By a study of the records and writings of the Rosicrucian society, or the society of the Rose Cross, — Rose representing secrecy, and Cross rep- resenting salvation of humankind, — which flowered during the Elizabethan period, we find that Bacon was one of its prominent members, that it aimed at the advancement of human knowledge, that it employed the above-mentioned methods of con- cealed expression to keep its secrets sacred for the Sons of Sapience. Thus, we may be reasonably sure that Bacon was acquainted with the inweav- ing of special messages into the warp and woof of literary productions. Moreover, Bacon had declared, in the works we do credit to him, that advancement of humankind could be best effected by romance and poetry. This would explain the great moral lessons of the Shakespearian dramas. Let us pause to regard some instances of this hidden type of expression. Though there have been brought forward all sorts of cryptograms, ana- grams, and cabalistic arrangements proving Bacon to be the author, we shall glance at but a few. In Love ' s Labour ' s Lost Act V, Sc. I, we encounter the peculiar word, Hononficabilitudini- tatibus. This word seems to cry for some ex- planation. The Baconians come to the rescue and declare it to be an anagram which, when rearranged, contains the Latin sentence ... Hi

Page 30 text:

Twenty-Si. MASMID Aspects of Judaism By Rabbi Dr. Leo Jung I. SOME ASPECTS OF JUDAISM Judaism is the religion of the Jew. It is based on the Torah of Moses. Torah means direction. We look upon the Torah as the direction to happy and noble life. The faith in the revelation of God ' s Will is the immovable foundation of Jewish survival. Without acceptance of the authority of the Torah, a Jewish generation, however brilliant, powerful, philanthropic, has in the many instances of our historical experience proved too weak to withstand the assaults of outside influences. With the elim- ination of that faith, the Jewish community had eliminated its vital force, and rapidly disappeared in the majority. Beyond this principle Judaism has no dogma. From time to time problems have arisen, the formu- lation of which, or the solution to which, seemed to touch foundations of the faith, and during cer- tain of these periods Judaism ' s attitude toward these ideas was considered as of dogmatic importance. But their importance shrunk as new problems be- gan to focus general attention on themselves. Judaism knows no literalism or fundamentalism. The text of the Bible is subjected to ever new interpretations, and each new interpretation has been hailed as the fruit of the faith, and welcomed as an additional source of mental and spiritual en- richment. This principle is not a child of our liberal age, but has been acted upon for the last two millennia, by rabbi and learned layman alike. II. THE METHOD OF JUDAISM For Jewish life, however, this interpreting ac- tivity, whilst fruitful and encouraging, is not all- important. When a Jewish boy reaches religious maturity (at the age of thirteen), he is not asked or admonished as to faith and interpretation, he is enjoined as to the traditional ideals and observances of Jewish life. In Jewish thought the division has long been recognized between obvious social postu- lates like honesty, chastity, love of one ' s neighbor, and between what are called ceremonies. This division, however, was not made in the Bible. The Torah embraces every aspect of life and its text knows of no division between ceremonial and moral law. In Judaism they are co-ordinated. Judaism has demanded from its adherents loyalty to its social ideals. But Judaism has never been satisfied with the mere call to great ideals. Hu- manity, according to the Torah, needs more than announcements, however solemn or emphatic, of abstract goals. General great ideals have a habit of impressing our emotions without influencing our conduct. Judaism holds that a training is necessary in a habit which will always consider the ideal, that the ideal must be brought home, first by humani- tarian exercises, then by symbols and ceremonies, conveying emotional experiences which keep the vision of beauty and goodness before the people, without which view the ideal becomes stale, a futile phrase. Thus Love thy neighbor as thyself is twice enjoined in Leviticus, the third book of the Torah of Moses. But the very same chapter insists on the practical realization of its implication. It de- mands part of our annual harvest as our minimum contribution to our poor neighbor. The ceremonial of Jewish holidays is a veritable symphony of good- ness, from the gift to the poor on the eve of the holy day so that the stranger at our gate too, may rejoice on the day of our feast, to the many religious acts and symbols expressive of cosmo- politan human sympathy. The ceremony indeed is the method of Judaism. It connects practical life in all its variety and all its activities with the spiritual truths of religion; it gives tang ible form to those ideas and ideals. Judaism not only states the ideal, but consistently.