Zoom+Scroll Leonardo da Vinci's Blasphemous Joke "The Last Supper" in High Res.

reply to post by aboutface


I explained the joke just before you posted or maybe at the same time.

then, after that, I guess it just keeps on getting funnier, her cutting the bread, getting her hand twisted behind her back - OMG, it DOES start getting funnier, once you've got the central premise that I outlined.

OMG, I've borken the Da Vinci Code!

broken.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by LightningStrikesHere

 

It IS a very heretical joke.

I've unravelled it's core mystery, which is about the resurrection, Jesus' foreknowledge of it, which is settling over them in realization, of what he intends, which is to survive the ordeal, grab his girlfriend by the hand (making of her his wife

) and leave for those yonder hills in the background, never to return again, and now he's alone in his unfathomable mystery, while they are up in arms, even outraged over his intention, to simply leave them.

But at the same time, they cannot really understand him fully, or the depths of his intentionality and weigh it as to it's righteousness, but here they are certainly drawing their own conclusions about it, and what it's implication is, mostly for themselves (they've left Jesus right out of the conversation by now).

This is the realization which settles over the whole painting, which isn't even ABOUT the desciples EITHER, no - it's those rolling hills in the distance, beconing, a bell waiting to be rung (even a Marriage Bell)!

Can you imagine?

It's pandamonium! But Jesus is seen here just as much the sacrificial lamb as he is a human being with his own self interests, but for him the "left hand cannot know what the right hand is doing"... So while he knows everything, he has to be the only one in the room pretending that nothing untoward is taking place all around him, he's as oblivious to them as they are to him!

It IS amuzing, and I'll bet there's still a lot more where that came from and based on your discoveries too.

What fun!

Originally posted by aboutface
reply to post by NewAgeMan

 

I am vaguely familiar with the painting, but not being visual, I'll play along for the fun of it without going to other sited to see clearer depictions.

I could not help but count the hands. That was the first thing I did after wondering why the figures were layered in such clothing. The fellow in blue at the center seems to have a disembodied hand.

The woman next to Jesus is the one holding the knife, but for some reason, the fellow who is whispering in her ear has grabbed her knife hand at the wrist and placed it behind himself on the table. Did he really think she was the betrayer perhaps, since the church has always denigrated women? She was about to cut the bread, or whatever is in her other hand, but is this the joke? It's as though he is preventing her from doing something foolish? Yet her other hand is holding what appears to be bread, or maybe it's cheese. And what the heck is in the plate beneath the knife? Yuck.

And Jesus, because for the moment he can't know what the right hand is doing, is unaware that his girlfriend and wife to be is almost certainly being held hostage rather than permit her the honor of cutting the bread, and thus initiating (consumating) the meal.

oh dear...

I have to admit that it's getting kind of amuzing, particularly when you realize that he painted it on the inside of a church for monks to meditate on whenever they sit down to a meal together.


That da Vinci! Quite the genius AND comedian as well - what couldn't he do?


Ok, that's the larger context - but there's still a whole ton of treasure hunting to be had through a combing of the high-res version, maybe even the odd clue here and there by which to test my hypothesis as to what's really "going on" in this depiction of "The Last Supper" by Leonardo da Vinci.


Best Regards,

NAM

reply to post by NewAgeMan


indeed , maybe it was of his marriage ? makes more sens to me then the last supper , what say you ats ?

I'd like to clarify something



Two of the men are holding out their hands in a plaintive "not me" fashion, so they're at various stages of concern and it IS about that moment right after he let it be known that someone had betrayed him, and Judas is there (I'll come back tomorrow with a numbered listing of who's who or who is supposed to be who), BUT, there are different levels of realization, with those to his right seemingly in the know and those on his left, largely in the dark, with one exception - the guy to his immediate left with the light green garb on, staring agape and in shocked dismay at Jesus right hand, which is reaching for more, the one Jesus isn't aware of - and so there's the joke or a big part of it. The other funny part is the smug guy behind him, almost behind Jesus giving Jesus the finger so to speak, while pointing straight up (something I refer'd to earlier with a link to page 4 of another thread).

you have to zoom and scroll a bit to check out the look on the guy's face (the one to Jesus' immediate left with the light green clothing).

Zoom+Scroll HERE

Link: www.haltadefinizione.com...

You can't tell me that's not funny or intended, by da Vinci himself, to be funny.


Best Regards,

NAM

reply to post by LightningStrikesHere

Not his wedding, but his wedding TO BE (post-resurrection/recuscitation) - which is why the V space is there, signifying temporary chastity in togetherness.

So it's about everything this side AND the other side of the crucifxion and resurrection, and BOTH absolute selflessness AND selfishness on Jesus' part, in this depiction.

It's both, and when you realize it's about both occurances (one ending, and a new life), Jesus actual triumph begins to shine through the apparent desparation and utter confusion of the scene, and we can come to identify with his serenity, that he had all his bases covered so to speak. (that's funny!)

It's intended to tug the heart however, away from Jesus (who's just fine) to the plight of his disciples, as if Jesus is unconcerned for them and is more than happy to leave them in a scattered state, which isn't really true. And then again, he's done nothing wrong, so he can't be faulted. In fact, it may very well be that the next phase of his life, to be happy and fullfilled, beyond the horrors of the cross, in a state of bliss with his father, would be needed to generate the domain of happiness and joy which those very disciples would one day inhabit with him where he is ie: that he really did need to prepare a place for us (them), just not in the way we've been taught or might have expected.

Simon Peter said unto him, Lord, whither goest thou? Jesus answered him, Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now; but thou shalt follow me afterwards.
~ John 13:36, KJV

And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there you may be also.
~ John, 14:3

so it could be said that here the sheep are being hit with a stick and are scattering, while for Jesus, a new and happy future awaits on the other side of the cross, his new Bride to be, and soon (note the slight "Elvis sneer" of Jesus) his actual wife.

And there isn't anything wrong with that either, and if anyone deserved or warrented a happy and fullfilled human life it was Jesus, and so the conclusion that da Vinci seems to draw and is offering us is indeed imho, a blasphemy, and the final analysis of the painting taken together can leave a person feeling very empty as if there's nothing of value being conveyed at all - just silliness, and that's not true, so it's a heresy of sorts.. not pro-Jesus and yet it is, if you have the gaul to take this all in and keep rooting for Jesus anyway, because it is, after all, The Last Supper!

Heretical? Yes, Funny? Yes. Inspirational - you be the judge..

This is a very interesting thread. I cant devote much time to it now, but I will check it out once I get free. Thanks for posting it. Much food for thought.

What, is the Joke?

The "joke" involves a type of awakening realization into a state of blissful joy, laughter and love at the contemplation of his painting, as to it's final message.

Let me explain, keeping in mind what's already been conveyed earlier, and I was wrong btw that Leonardo might have been conveying an-anti Jesus message or that he wasn't pro-Jesus. No it would seem in the final analysis that his understanding of Jesus was very great, even exceeding that of the chuch, at least in terms of it's "outer porch" of a strict doctrinal interpretation of the events of the life (and death and resurrection) of Jesus Christ.

It (the joke) then is in the V-space between Jesus and the one to his right, and it's in the transcendant backdrop beyond the intollerable conundrum of the room. It's in the notion that "the left hand must not know what the right hand is doing" with the person to Jesus' left utterly gobsmacked (Godsmacked?) at the recognition as to what's really happening here, as he stares, gape-mouthed, arms outstretched (in full realization), at Jesus' right hand that is reaching for more..

Still further, it's the threatening straight hand across throat gesture towards Mary Magdelene (it HAS to be her or the whole context falls apart) by the disciple to her right, and who, it appears, may have actually pulled her over to him to whisper something in her ear, by twisting her arm behind her back while grasping her other hand to prevent her from cutting the bread and initiating the consumation of the meal.

It's in Judas, of Arabic descent I might add, sitting patiently and obediantly, looking to Jesus as if for instruction, the possibility of a sac of coins hidden under his cloak.

Still further we have all the disciples under suspicion, wondering just who it is, among them, who's betrayed Jesus ("Is it YOU?" "NO, not ME?!") while the general impression we're being given, apparently, in looking at the human interaction of the scene and within the overall context of this being "The Last Supper" is that of blissfully unaware abandonment on Jesus part, who's in love, a love of many and ALL kinds not even excluding human sexuality and sexual appetite (see his upper righ lipped "sneer" also wanting more) but who, for the purpose of remaining pure, has kept himself chaste up until this point (kept apart).

And then finally, amid the apparent mutual abandonment of Jesus and his disciples ie: none are paying the other much attention if you'll notice, and as [the room] (which is a cross in pespective) begins to deaden in examining the relationships and how seemingly out of touch they are with Jesus and he, them (except maybe the one to his right) we are given to begin to see and recognize both the left AND right-handed aspects as symbolic of death and resurrection, and on BOTH sides of the cross..

- the joke is when we, the viewer, now faced with the tension, conflict and anxiety, and the final deadening of the room ("be with" the scene for a bit and you'll know what I mean by that), when the joke is actually at risk of being lost - the joke is when we are invited to reconsider that V-space yet again, and contemplate, through the windows, the outer boundaries of the rolling hills and rising mountains which transcends both the room itself and the intollerable circumstances contained therein, such that the joke is restored, in the love and laughter of better things as yet unseen, of something not visible, that can only be intimated..


And we are then, at this point in our contemplation of the elements of the painting, also invited to completely ignore, in sympathetic, harmonious bliss, with Jesus, the present circumstance (of the box), however seemingly intollerable (and confusing) it may be, and simply transcend the frame of the room, which also contains, in perspective, the cross and thus the horrors of the cross itself!

Brilliant! Genius!

How marvelous!

Way to go da Vinci!

It's a "blasphemous" "joke" only by the standards of church doctrine, but it's really not blasphemous at all once its true meaning, and purpose, is revealed and realized.

Indeed it would appear that the great genius Leonardo da Vinci understood Jesus very well, better perhaps even than the church itself. It's not anti-Jesus at all, as I'd suggested earlier.

And ultimately the V-space on Jesus' right hand then comes to represent not just the love of a marriage union, but the transcendant love of God whereby we are all of us, at heart, "Brides to be" so to speak (in need of reunion) and so in this way, it IS also a wedding, a wedding TO BE realized at last, by the one who contemplates its true meaning and significance.

Thank you Leonardo, much appreciated, and well done! I GET it! It's beautiful, and magnificant!

And as to the third one to Jesus' left seen with both hands pointing to his own heart and clamoring over the others as if to say, pleadingly, "what about ME?!"

Simon Peter said unto him, Lord, whither goest thou? Jesus answered him, Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now; but thou shalt follow me afterwards.
~ John 13:36, KJV

And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there you may be also.
~ John, 14:3

So, no one noticed Jesus' robe? Red and Blue??? How about the fact that Jesus has his right eye focused on his right hand; but His head is leaning towards the left...with a "woe is me"/helpless look. Notice the guy, next to Jesus' right side, also trying to grab something. It looks like he's ready to punch somebody. It looks like Jesus is going for the bread and the man next to him is going for the silver. The group on the right, looks like they're plotting something against Jesus'...and the one guy (3rd left) has his hands up...like he wants no part in it. And the guy on the far right...has a crazed look on his face. It looks like the woman is grabbing something, and sliding it closer to her. Definitely part of the plot, maybe the leader of it???

On the other side of the table...it looks like the guy in white, has a following...the guy in green, can't believe what he's seeing; and the guy, right next to him....looks like he's being restrained.

I think all but 2 people, in that picture, were about to lay the smack down on Jesus. Maybe that's why it was called: "The Last Supper".

The first thing that stood out to me when I looked at the picture in detail is the placement of Jesus' hands. His left hand faces up, while the right hand faces down. Makes me think of "as above, so below".

It's also interesting to note that while the V space to Jesus' right points down - which seems to resemble a downward arrow - the man to his left is pointing up, re-emphasizing Jesus' hand placement.

Originally posted by nuttin4nothin
The group on the right, looks like they're plotting something against Jesus'...and the one guy (3rd left) has his hands up...like he wants no part in it.

Good one, and the arm points over the shoulder to the man who I believe is holding Mary captive and threatening her, both with the hand cutting across her throat and in whatever he's whispering in her ear.

It gets more and more interesting, an potentially amuzing, the more you look at it, but make no mistake that Jesus' eventual triumph is also contained in the painting.

And as the circumstances of the room become ever more intollerable, if not funny, even hilarious for us the viewer who's taking it all in - we are drawn towards that V-space of harmony, and to the rolling hills and rising mountains that remain ever-present outside the boundaries of the room itself, and then like I said before, at that point, we're invited to also ignore it (the circumstances of the room) in a bliessful state of both complete acceptance, and a very well considered (to say the least) anticipation of infinitely better things as yet unseen, of the kind capable of altogether transcending the room ie: "where your heart is, there will be your treasure also". That said, Jesus has deeper motives for apparently abandoning them all. No, he'll still deliver on his promise, which is as much for them, as it is for him.

It sure is filled with agonizing tension though, and when you look at the actual human interaction, it's a "joke" that runs the risk of losing it's sense of humor, unless and until you (I mean anyone) can come to see and recognize the transcendant element of anticipated future joy and happiness, and a triumph capable of altogether transcending the cross itself, which the room, in perspective, symbolizes, also as an anticipation in this case of even greater sorrow and anguish, and a suffering capable of carried the full weight of all the complexities of all manner of human conflict also symbolized here in the disciples reactions and responses.

Originally posted by celebration
The first thing that stood out to me when I looked at the picture in detail is the placement of Jesus' hands. His left hand faces up, while the right hand faces down.

There's WAY more to it than that, but yes, this is the crux of it, the point on which the whole painting turns, where Jesus, the ceterpoint of attraction and central element of the painting, looks down forelornly, if not sadly, at his left hand, open and containing, clearly nothing, while on his right hand, unbeknownst to just about everyone (exept the guy to his immediate left that is..lol although even he doesn't really "get it"), including most people who see the painting, placing the vast majority of viewers into the role of one or more of the disciples (including Judas!) - on his right hand resides the very kingdom of heaven and the blissful joy, celebration and triumph capable of completely transcending the ah..difficulties (lol) inherent in the apparent conundrum of the moment, which is filled with confusion, denial, anger and resentment, obediance (in this case, Judas himself) even angish and despair, or the whole range of human suffering, with the table itself symbolizing the sorrow and suffering of the cross (look at the perspective of the room, and how the table is the horizontal left/right axis of a cross-space).

So it's a secret or hidden joke and happy triumph, known only to Leonardo da Vinci himself, and now, at last, shared, with us, right here, right now, at ATS!

So indeed it's an absolute masterpiece by an absolute genius of his age, and perhaps, next only to Jesus himself, of all time! But that said, it sure is nice to finally understand precisely WHY it's an actual masterpiece.


P.S. To keep the joke alive.. and find out why Jesus didn't leave town post-crucifixion an impoverished begger, go HERE in the thread The Life of Issa and the Gospels

Best Regards,

NAM

And the guy with the finger pointing straight up, he's angry, or at least smug and self-righteous and it's as if he's giving Jesus "the finger" while saying something like "you'd BETTER be going straight up" but he doesn't understand either what Jesus is really doing, and why. It's pretty amuzing as well though.

There two other mystery paintings that are, imho, highly relevant to this thread, and they are:

"John the Baptist", also by da Vinci, and a strangely entitled painting called "Adoration of the Magi" by Sandro Botticelli

What does this represent?

Adoration of the Magi
by Sandro Botticelli, 1475-76

And I'm not referring here to The Medici family and friends, the connoisseurs of Renaissance art at the time.

www.paradoxplace.com...


And who is the bearded man, up top, beneath the ray of light breaking into the scene through the roof?

Let me tell you who it represents, for clue #3, that's Nicodemus, who was a Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin, yet nevertheless a close friend and confident of Jesus, who had friends in high places, including wealthy friends such a Joseph of Arimathea (clue #4). The adoration of the Magi, is his, towards them all, including the "baby Jesus" depicted there, but wait, wasn't it much later that the 12 were gathered..? (clue #5).

It should also be noted that Botticelli painted the painting with the intention of HIDING it, from anyone's sight, for a long time (on fear of severe persecution by the Church if it was discovered and viewed, and by "severe" persecution, we all know what that means). Why would such a gifted artist risk his very LIFE to paint a painting that no one would be able to SEE, rolled up and placed in hiding, for a period of well over at least 100 years, if I'm not mistaken, before it was discovered, and ah "brought to light". Why?

Intrigued yet? And is there more to the story of the Magi than Three Kings on Camels, and if so who ARE they really and where did THEY come from, and why, and what precisely is represented by the star over Bethlehem, if the story of "The Three Wise Men" is taken allegorically, and not quite literally..?

reply to post by Biliverdin

 

I disagree. The Gospels indicate that Jesus held John The Baptist in the very highest regard ie: "there are none born of a woman greater than John", the only differentiation here being that Jesus, although of course also born of a woman considered himself re-born from above, not of the flesh, but of the spirit.

Nicodemus and Jesus - Reborn
go to 2:24 in the vid - segment runs to 5:35

Note catefully the subtle nuances (intentionally directed) in this exchange between Jesus and Nicodemus surrounding the issue of rebirth.

John the Baptist,
by Leonardo da Vinci,
1513/16
www.artbible.info...

Wikipedia

St. John the Baptist is an oil painting on walnut wood by Leonardo da Vinci. Completed from 1513 to 1516, when the High Renaissance was metamorphosing into Mannerism, it is believed to be his last painting. The original size of the work was 69x57 cm. It is now exhibited at the Musée du Louvre in Paris, France.

The piece depicts St. John the Baptist in isolation. St. John is dressed in pelts, has long curly hair, and is smiling in an enigmatic manner which is reminiscent of Leonardo's famous Mona Lisa. He holds a reed cross in his left hand while his right hand points up toward heaven (like St Anne in Leonardo's cartoon The Virgin and Child with St Anne and St John the Baptist). It is believed that the cross and wool skins were added at a later date by another painter.

The pointing gesture of St. John toward the heavens suggests the importance of salvation through baptism that John the Baptist represents. The work is often quoted by later painters, especially those in the late Renaissance and Mannerist schools. The inclusion of a gesture similar to John's would increase the importance of a work with a religious conceit.

The effeminate, androgynous portrayal of St. John where he is usually seen as a gaunt and muscular figure is unusual.

A suggested reason for the darkened background is in reference to the description of St.John in the Bible as 'a light that shineth in the darkness'.

en.wikipedia.org...(Leonardo)

The John Gesture

In 1997, Lynn Picknett & Clive Prince introduced the so-called “John gesture”: a specific pose painted by Leonardo da Vinci. They were at pains to clearly identify the symbolism of the gesture, but with a little help of Hermetic magic… ?

What is the “John gesture”? Picknett & Prince identified that da Vinci in his paintings often depicted certain people as raising their right index finger skywards. This is very pronounced in da Vinci’s painting of John the Baptist, but even in the Last Supper, one figure makes the John gesture.

Other painters seem to have noticed this was one of da Vinci’s trademarks. Raphael depicted Leonardo as Plato in his The School of Athens, where Leonardo/Plato is depicted with the “John gesture”. That this “John gesture” is also present in many of the paintings in the Turin Cathedral, could be a mere coincidence, but we note that the “John gesture” is extremely rare to be found in iconography. So: coincidence? Or more evidence for Picknett & Prince’s theory?

What does the John gesture mean? In short, Picknett & Prince do not know, but do construct a possible scenario. John the Baptist is notorious for his right index finger, with which he identified Jesus as the “Son of God”. For Picknett & Prince, the “John gesture” should be read as a concealed reference to John the Baptist, in which the sign says “remember John the Baptist”.

Let us detach for now the “John gesture” from all of its built-up theorizing. What we are left with, is a curiosity in the work of da Vinci, whereby certain paintings show a person who is raising a right index finger. What could it mean? To repeat, the “John gesture” is not solely linked with John the Baptist; a number of people in his paintings show “the finger”, even though for the most parts they are linked with the Baptist. The key question is: what does the finger mean?

www.philipcoppens.com...

They don't have a clue. But I know what it means and signifies, and I am convinced that people like da Vinci and Botticelli knew things that the average Joe did not, but that they nevertheless wanted communicated, yet sereptitiously and by veiled inference, so as not to get them into any trouble with the Church.

And since no one's figured it out and stated it outright, except perhaps in the Vatican archives or something, we have the priviledge of allowing such paintings as John the Baptist and Adoration of the Magi, to speak to us now, today, even in this very thread right here at ATS.

Still more clues to follow, stay tuned..

I think that people like da Vinci and Botticelli knew certain secrets that they wanted to preserve and convey in plain site, yet without getting themselves into too much trouble with the Roman Church, which offer us clues that are relevant to this thread, so I'm going to add it here for consideration. However, I'm a little hesitant to just go ahead and tro to join all the dots and make all the connections for people, because some of the implications are rather blasphemous by most Christian standards, and some may be just too painful or too horrific to say out loud and the last thing I would ever want to do would be to in any way demean Jesus or throw pearls to swine who would only trample them under foot, so to speak, and it's also fun to discover such things on our own, and I've just made it a little easier to find the next clue to the puzzle that unlocks the mystery.

Best Regards,

NAM

What is interesting about Boticelli's Painting "The Adoration of the Magi"



Aside from the twist on the Bethlehem story, and that it's actually about Nicodemus' adoration of the 12, is the background showing a fallen empire, and that in the space where Mother and Child reside, not one stone or brick is left on another, so it's also a jab at the Roman Church as Roman empire, or, the revelation that, eminating from these 12, was enfolded the fall of the Roman empire, but that it wouldn't have worked without the adoration of the Pharisee, Nicodemus, who I understand was himself later killed for something highly controversial that he was involved with in relation to Jesus of Nazareth..

Oh this thread moved,so many interesting new perspectives that might explain...so many things.
I never heard about the bell tower in the background of The Last Supper before. Churches and salvation Army workers use bells in their service to summon the flock, but then again so does the hotel California in Vegas. What did Judas do with that sack of Roman coins again? Nice exercise in creative interpretation.

Now Botticelli always struck me as painting from a more feminist perspective so I usually keep that in mind when looking for connections.