This contest over the control of Logos, central to the contest over Media, Art and Religion, we safely assume, has been a constant issue, in the interaction between Semite and Aryan. Here the Semite appears and through a careful, innocuous-seeming, yet emboldening use of language and symbols, moves stealthily into a dominant position over the Aryan. This is JEM. When the Aryan reacts, the Semite plies the same superior command of language and symbols to silence him, to militate his own brethren and body against him.
Indeed, the ritual of eating Hamentasch, טאש-המן, during Purim should, for example, be understood as a veneration and promotion of Jewish censorship. Hamentasch is a pastry designed to symbolize the ears and/or pockets of “Haman.”
Haman was a rival of the Jews appearing in the Book of Esther. He is a figure understood as conspiring to eliminate the Jews in Persia. He is eventually outmaneuvered, however, particularly through the influence of Queen Esther on Xerxes. Esther is either Jewish, as is exoterically understood, or in the employ of Jews as we will explicate in this study.
Whereas formerly Haman had influence on the King, this influence is usurped by the Persian “Jewish Lobby.” Haman is eventually hung on the gallows he had prepared for his rival, the Jew Mordecai. The ears that are eaten during the Purim ritual indicate a Jewish censorship theme, where Jews are obstructing and disrupting the communication between Aryans or, rather, “eating their ears.”
In this manner it is akin to the Jewish God appearing in Genesis 11 to “confuse the language” of racial competitors seeking to build a tower to heaven. The ears here are Haman’s and not, ostensibly, the King’s, the one whose “ear” is valuable to Haman and most relevant. So how do I arrive at my conclusion?
Hamantash, טאש-המן, means Haman’s pockets in Yiddish. In Hebrew this pastry is Ozen Haman, אוזן המן, which means “Haman’s ears.” Interestingly, in the Modern Hebrew, it also means “the mannequin.” Perhaps as well it is a synonym for “dummy,” “puppet,” “stooge” etc. It is oddly applied here to “Haman’s ears” but further analysis may clarify.
Zen,[אֹזֶן,[3 which means “ear” may also mean “handle” or “lug.” The English word “ear” also carries this sense and may refer to “an object resembling the external ear in shape or position, such as a handle on a jug.” Hence this additional sense of the word “ear” forms presumably from a purely visual similarity between a type of handle and the human ear. Speculatively, in both instances, though, an “ear” in this secondary sense may have developed, at least in part, from a metaphor that understands “the ear” also as a “handle” or means of control. This sense is suggested, for example, in the English idiom to “have someone’s ear.”
The figure Haman is clearly an archetype and is better understood as representing Aryans or an Aryan noble class more broadly. Likewise he’s a stock villain. In fact, a figure bearing the same name as Haman appears in the Koran in precisely the same roll, as an antagonist of the Jews, only there as a servant of the Pharaoh in in Egypt. We see Haman as a racial archetype, for instance, in his name Haman, המן, which in the Hebrew also means “manna.” Manna is a vaguely defined food that appeared to the Israelites during Exodus. This connection of Haman with manna conforms to a “Consumption Motif” that understands Aryans as “consumables.”
Thus to eat Haman’s ears is also to eat the “ears” of the Aryans, to make them “deaf,” benighted, removed from important information or stimuli. Hence a censorship motif is implicit. This conforms as well to a common “Hamsa Motif” appearing in JEM that this book explicates. In brief, this motif indicates the deceiving of an Aryan adversary through a metaphorical blinding or desensitizing. Likewise, to eat Haman’s pockets is to eat the Aryan’s wealth and resource.
Regardless, between the Hebrew and the Yiddish, we appear to find a double metaphor, one that links the dominating of Aryan resources and even genetics to Jewish censorship. Such a link and theme is perhaps developed more clearly in Chapter 6 of The Book of Daniel.
This relates to Daniel’s famous visit to the lion’s den. In this tale, Daniel is on the brink of being promoted over his Aryan rivals into a seat of power, second only to the Aryan ruler, Darius himself. The tale describes how his rivals, figures directly analogous to Haman, conspire to depose him. Unable to find a speck of corruption in the careful and wily Daniel, they convince Darius to issue a decree ordering whomever bows or prays to a God or human being other than Darius to be thrown in the “lion’s den.” To fully understand this parable, we must understand first that Darius is himself a synonym for the visible, openly ruling, Apollonian Aryan god. Hence, simply, Daniel is being asked to bow to Aryan power.
Naturally Daniel, being a Jew, defies the decree, prays to his own God, who represents his race, and is thrown in the Lion’s den. Though there, in the Lion’s den, miraculously, “God” sends “his angel” to “shut the mouths of the lion.” Here it is important to understand that the lion is a symbol of the Aryan as well as, of course, royalty and nobility. The latter association it retains to this day. Hence “lions” would include Darius himself.
Indeed, the lion as a symbol of nobility and Aryanness was established early on, in Mesopotamia. We see this for example through its connection to Inanna/Ishtar, a sought-after Aryan goddess who is synonymous with Venus. The Hebrew likewise appears to corroborate this. There the word Ari, אַרִי, for example, means both “Aryan” and “Lion.”
The figure of Judah, of course, through “Jacob’s blessing” becomes an important exception here. This designation of the Jew as lion in Genesis we will refer to as the “Jacobean Swap.” In that instance, lion becomes a “status signifier” indicating dominion.
Regardless, the shutting of the lion’s or Aryan’s mouth, in Daniel 6, becomes, of course, a reference to censoring or silencing of nobility or the ruling Aryan more generally. How is this achieved? There is much to unpack here. Some of it we may only treat briefly now and corroborate later.
A clue is given as Daniel is sealed in the lion’s den. A stone is placed over the entrance of the cave which is sealed by Darius signet ring and the signet ring of his nobles. The stone is a symbol for Jewry and the “Jewish God.” Indeed, it is perhaps the most common symbol for Jewry appearing in JEM.
Hence the impressing of the signet ring signifies authority being given over to Jewry. More than that the ring itself, particularly the gold ring, is an Aryan vaginal symbol, while the stone a Jewish phallic symbol. Indeed, the den itself is a vaginal symbol, like Christ’s tomb, and David’s cave of Adullam. Lion’s den or Aryan’s den makes its meaning especially explicit. To wit it is an Aryan vagina.
The sexual metaphor here is corroborated by other clues, particularly the reoccurrence of the number three. In the parable the king’s decree requires Daniel pray for thirty days, he responds by praying to the Jewish God three times a day. The number three, as this study explicates, is an allusion to sexual interaction as well as Jewish insemination of Aryan stocks.
Indeed, we might suspect this metaphor of cave or den as vaginal or womb metaphor, appearing in Biblical works, as a site of seasonal return or miraculous resurrection, to be closely related to the Myth of the Semitic Mercury’s birth. Mercury was born in a cave in the mountain of Cyllene to Maia from the seed of the Aryan Jupiter. Yet “Cyllene” was also understood as a Semitic oread or mountain nymph. Hence arguably here the cave becomes her vagina. Mythologists identify Cyllene consort as Pelasgus, the eponymous ancestor of the Pelasgians, whom I identify in this study as a proto-Jewish group.
Though, of course, the underworld in general, in mythology, carries vaginal or womb associations. It seems clear, for example, that this association is made in Genesis. There it says “Elohim created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.” The Hebrew for “and female” here is neqebah, וּנְקֵבָ֖ה, which translates in the modern Hebrew as “hole” or “tunnel.”
Regardless the suggestion here, in Daniel, is of intermixture, to wit Jews intermarrying with nobility. Lastly the stone in JEM is also a monetary symbol as this book reveals. Indeed, as much as the Jewish God is the Logos, he is also the shekel. Thus another mechanism of “shutting the lion’s mouth” is revealed. Indeed, it is not even Daniel that it is being entombed in here. It is the “lion” by the stone of Jewry.
We have seen already, however, in our lifetimes, and throughout history, that this stone is moveable by Logos and Symbol. A genius in Logos and Symbol, in the end, controls the stone and makes it a mere orbiting satellite next to Apollo’s gravity, an Omphalos in his possession. This study seeks to inaugurate this process.
 Hamentasch is a Yiddish word.
 Purim is a Jewish festival marking when the Jewish people were saved from Haman the Evil who had planned to kill them all. See the Book of Esther in the Hebrew Bible/Tanakh.
 Ozen, אוזן, means “an ear.”
 Surah 28:35-42 and 40:36-7
 Daniel 6:8
 Daniel 6:10
 Genesis 1:27