Mysteries of Sepher Yetzirah

kwaw

The 'onion' model, planetary/tarot attributions

I have explained elsewhere how an 'onion' model may be derived from SY 2:4 whereby setting the letters in a circle and pairing each letter we derive 10 concentric circles [sefiroth] 22 radii [paths] and 231 connections [gates].

We may draw parallels between the concentric circle model and the similar cosmological model.

The first, outer circle that encompasses and contains the rest represents within the terminology of later kabbalistic redactions Kether, and is analagous to the outer circle of the cosmological model which represents the first cause.

The second is Chokmah, the circle of stars.
Third Binah, Saturn; fourth Chesed, Jupiter, fifth Gevurah, Mars, sixth Tiphareth, Sun; Seventh Netzach, Venus; Eighth Hod, Mercury; Ninth Yesod, Moon and tenth and last inner circle Malkuth, Earth.

If we transcribe the 'onion' cosmological model to the later model of the ToL we find then the attributions fit those of the GD. Looking at his model we see that from Malkuth as Earth we have a representation of the geo-centric model based upon the Chaldean order of planets. We have also the Sun at Tiphareth in the centre, with the inner planets and moon between Earth [Malkuth] and the Sun [at Tiphareth], with the outer planets above; so also we have a heliocentric model.

It is probable that the planetary squares of the planets as described by Agrippa [Occult Philosophy] are based on the cosmological model. The Saturn square has nine cells being a square of three, Saturn being the third sphere [counting frm the outer to the inner]; and so on for the rest.

Transcribed to the planetary hexagram we have in Chaldean order Saturn at the top point, Jupiter TR, Mars TL, Sun Center, Venus BR, Mercury BL and Moon Bottom. We see here the several pairs relating to planetary rulerships, Saturn opposite Lights, whose signs are opposite in the zodiac, Jupiter opposite Mercury, whose signs are opposite in the zodiac, Mars opposite Venus, whose signs are opposite in the zodiac.

If we take the numbers of the planets then the numbers in opposite wings add up to 12, Saturn [3] and Moon [9]; Jupiter [4] and Mercury [8]; Mars [5] and Venus [7]. All together the three pairs add to 36, the square of the Sun[6] in the center.

Placed around a septagram in Chaldean order we have the same correspondence of pairings as in the Hexagram. Draw a horizontal line connecting the wings we have a bottom pairing of Saturn/Moon, then Jupiter/Mercury, Mars/Venus and Sun at the top
.

Following the lines of the septagram we get the orders of the days of the week. This is because the names of the days are based upon the Chaldean ordering of the planetary hours, tables of which are common among kabbalistic based medieval grimoires and which are considered of prime importance in kabbalistic [jewish] astrology. The majority of the oldest versions of the SY attribute the double letters according to the Chaldean order. Most occult Tarot attributions however bear a closer parallel with the Gra redaction of the SY, circa 1800 c.e. If there are links in older historically 'non' occult decks such as the Marseille then any correspondence that may have been made would more likely to have followed the correspondence of the Chaldean order rather than that attributed to modern occult decks [IMHO].

A curious BTW:)
If we create a septagram drawing a line between every second planet instead of every third, we get the order starting with Mars [as it rules the first decan of the first sign]: Mars, Venus, Moon, Jupiter, Sun, Mercury, Saturn. Replace with the metals ruled by the planets then they are ordered according to their ascending atomic weight [rounded figure]: Iron [56], Copper [63], Silver [108], Tin [118], Gold [196], Mercury [200] and Lead [207].

Kwaw​
 

kwaw

Re: Bahir-64

Huck said:
Actually Kaplan explains, that the SY explains, that "the ten sefirot define a 5 dimensional space". In SY 1.5

Actually he translates:

"Ten Sphirot of Nothingness:
Their measure is ten
which have no end
A depth of beginning
----- A depth of end
A depth of good
----- A depth of evil
A depth of east
----- A depth of the west
A depth of north
----- a depth of south
The singular Master
God faithful King
dominates over tem all
from his holy dwelling
until eternity of eternities"

This is not 5-dimensional SPACE described in that, what the SY explains in this passage, it is normal 3 dimensional space together with a dimension of time and a dimension of moral judgment.

His misuse of "5-dimensionable space" is excusable, he's just not accurate with his words, such things happens.


I see it as you say, a simple inaccuracy in wording. Later he says five dimensional continuums, three of space, one of time and one of soul. And these are clearly defined in 1:5 as per your quote as five dimensional pairings of dimensional depths:

three of space - above, below; east, west; north, south:

one of time - beginning, end:

one of soul - good,evil.

That they should be seen as five pairs is also expressed in 1:3

"Ten sefirot of nothingness
in the number of ten fingers
five opposite five..."

It is as you say quite natural to consider the 10 as five pairs. 1:3 and 1:5 clearly demonstrate this is how they are viewed. So why then break up 1:14 into a pattern of 1,3,6? A pattern that does not fit with the pattern the text has previously established in 1:3 and 1:5 as five pairs?

The SY is a jewish text and the exegesis of '32 paths of wisdom' is most obviously to be found in Jewish theology. The most obvious is the one that Kaplan himself gives, that the Torah which is identified with wisdom begins with B[2] and ends with L[30].

The identification of the Torah with 'wisdom' goes back to the wisdom schools of Alexadria and in particular the teachings of Ben Sirah c. 180 bc, a 'soper' [a rare title given to wise men and scribes, note the root spr].


quote:
"..the most fruitful and most consequential idea of later Jewish 'wisdom' was the conception of hypostatized hokma, probably developed as a counterpart to the Canaanite Astarte, who in the Ptolemaic period was identified with Isis. It was understood as the 'mediatrix of creation', and at the same time formed the shaping and fashioning power within creation. In the course of the 'nationalization' of Jewish wisdom it was identified by Ben Sira with the Torah of Moses. In this, its affinity with certain philosophical conceptions became particularly clear, whether these were Stoic 'world law' or the Platonic 'world soul'. There was a close conjunction of Palestinian wisdom and Greek philosophy in the Jewish wisdom schools of Alexandria.....first to assert the dependence of the great Greek philosophers on Moses and with whom 'wisdom' and 'Logos', in conjuction with the number seven, which was equally holy to the Pythagoreans and the Jews, became the principle of the spiritual ordering of the world and at the same time the basis of the knowledge and moral will of the individual......... A consequence of this Torah ontogy was - as in Alexandria - a loss of historical consciousness, the Alexandrian Jewish philosophy of religion remained its missionary task and remained open to Hellenistic influence, Rabbinic Judaism seperated itself more and more from the outside world."

[end quote from 'Judaism and Hellenism' by Martin Hengel, p.249/250]

Kwaw
 

Huck

Kwaw: The SY is a jewish text and the exegesis of '32 paths of wisdom' is most obviously to be found in Jewish theology. The most obvious is the one that Kaplan himself gives, that the Torah which is identified with wisdom begins with B[2] and ends with L[30].

**** A "B and L" at the begin and end of a text, even if it is the Torah, which is then interpreted as "wisdom", forming together the word "heart", is a very sophisticated sign for "32 of wisom", not an "obvious" one.

But, although it is very unsecure in itself, I agree, it has the possibly merit to be a real sign, which means an intended sign of the author.
Why should the author have such a specific interest, to connect the Torah with the number 32? I think, cause the author knew the scheme of SY - as demonstrated by autorbis - and wished to hint to this system. He "obviously" belonged to that people, who thought the mentioned system as "important"

.
 

kwaw

Huck said:
**** A "B and L" at the begin and end of a text, even if it is the Torah, which is then interpreted as "wisdom", forming together the word "heart", is a very sophisticated sign for "32 of wisom", not an "obvious" one.


No it is in fact the most obvious one, to anyone familiar with rabbinic judaic exegesis and going back to a least the time of Ben Sirah (2nd cent. bce). It is obvious because it was 'common knowledge' taught within the schools of thought the SY addressed [schools of judaic mystical and/or rabbinic traditions].

But, although it is very unsecure in itself, I agree, it has the possibly merit to be a real sign, which means an intended sign of the author.
I tend to belief that you are prepared to accept it, not because it is in fact insecure in itself (which it totally untrue, it is well attested), but because you feel it does not neccesarily contradict your own position [which is true, as far you see it].

Why should the author have such a specific interest, to connect the Torah with the number 32?

I am not sure the original interest was in the number 32, but in the word LV, heart, mind, wisdom. This is attested to in Rabbinic Judaism from the midrash of the 'wise-heart' common in the bible and is also attested to in the wisdom literature of the 2nd c. b.c.e.in the works of Ben Sirah and others. It is well attested this has more to do with polito-religious politics than numerical mystycism, that came later. Certainly the number is important in numerical exegesis, but we have no evidence of that untill the 12th century. A little late without any supporting evidence to project onto meanings of the alphabet 2-3 thousand years before? And in time to suspect an oriental influence of the Hindu/Arabic numeracy and the philosophical and religious aspects that came with it?

Your view in historical perspective seems to me to go against the available information. You also seem to choose to interpret the passage of SY1:15 against the pattern of the passages that precede it.

Why 1, 3, 6? The previous passages set up a pattern of 4/6 or possibly 2/2/6 but 1, 3, 6? Why? On what precedent?

This is not to say yours or Autobis's exegesis is not of interest, but that in what you present so far IMHO there is not sufficient evidence to claim that this is the original intended point and that all other viewpoints are therefore wrong.

The historical evidence as I understand it [and I am not an historian or academic to any degree, so expect and welcome any correction] points against it. Within the context of Jewish mystical exegesis the 32/Torah paradigm would have been and is 'obvious' to anyone brought up and taught within that context.

This does not make your or autobis's concept 'wrong', a point you pick upon. Rather it may seem to emphasise the importance of the number 32. But you also need to take into account the historical [2nd c. bce] context in which the parallel is made - which is religio-political, not numerical. Later mystic traditions may, as we have done, make this or other numerical exegesis, but the histoircal record is against such being the intention from the beginning in terms of the connection between Torah and Wisdom.

I have no contention with the binary exegesis, except the claim that this was the original intent and all other interpretations are therefore wrong. The fact that it 'fits' [ if you ignore the precedent of sections of the SY to interpret the sefiroth in a pattern of 1, 3, 6] is not proof of original intent. I have made such similar proofs and your own comment has been 'isn't maths wonderful'. Implying that as my own 'numerical speculations' did not agree with your own they were a numerical construct without relevance; the same criticism you apply to me applies to your own. With the exception mine takes into account the majority of the text and is attested by historical evidence and commonly held interpretations that can be traced back.

The use of first and last letters to cipher a text can be attested from 9th century examples. The connection between wisdom and the heart by midrash of the 'wise-heart' references in the old testament to the 2nd century c.e. And the connection between Torah and Wisdom to references to the Judaic wisdom schools of the 2nd cent. b.c.e.

Also 'LB' while commonly meaning 'heart' also can be interpreted not only as 'mind', but also as 'wisdom' in and of itself without the qualification of 'hokmah lv' [wise heart] and is used as such in at least 6 places within the bible. The historical connection is attested, and the interpretation valid within present knowledge.

That is not to say your own or autobis's speculations are wrong, only that to judge thereby all other interpretations wrong is not only arrogant, but also irrelevant in that it is the interpretation that has affected historical development that is ultimately of importance.

Even if you are right and the rest are in error, from a historical perspective, it is that which developed from the 'error' that we must seek to correspond with the understanding of our subject [which has become somewhat lost in our differences. Mine is essentially any possible connection between the SY and alphnumeric mysticism during the period of Tarot development, though the subject has become sidetracked]. History is full of errors and misunderstandings, realizing so does not change the history. Nor does it neccesaraly contradict the 'truth' of present meaning. Truth in historical develpment may have in the end little to do with intention and conclusion. Truth in terms of philosophy, religion and mystical exegesis is never an established fact, but rather an ongoing process of discovery, of personal and collective reflection.

BTW: For your information, you may or may not know, the oldest excavated synagogue in China has an inscription stating that the religion of of the Chinese 'religion' originated with sons of Abraham;)

Kwaw
 

Huck

kwaw said:
No it is in fact the most obvious one, to anyone familiar with rabbinic judaic exegesis and going back to a least the time of Ben Sirah (2nd cent. bce). It is obvious because it was 'common knowledge' taught within the schools of thought the SY addressed [schools of judaic mystical and/or rabbinic traditions].

I tend to belief that you are prepared to accept it, not because it is in fact insecure in itself (which it totally untrue, it is well attested), but because you feel it does not neccesarily contradict your own position [which is true, as far you see it].


**** All this "evidence" you could cite to the "B=2 L=30" = 32 and LB '= heart = wisdom = "first and last letter of Torah" is of a much later time than the Torah itself. I call such evidence "insecure".
A "B" as first letter of a text together with an "L" as last letter of the same text can't be a "sure" message, even if 10.000 rabbis tell, it is, especially when these rabbis live 500 or 1000 years and more after the text. ****



I am not sure the original interest was in the number 32, but in the word LV, heart, mind, wisdom. This is attested to in Rabbinic Judaism from the midrash of the 'wise-heart' common in the bible and is also attested to in the wisdom literature of the 2nd c. b.c.e.in the works of Ben Sirah and others. It is well attested this has more to do with polito-religious politics than numerical mystycism, that came later. Certainly the number is important in numerical exegesis, but we have no evidence of that untill the 12th century.

**** The number 32 appears in the "song of pearls" inside an apocryphical text much earlier. Your ".... no evidence until the 12th century." is misleading. ****

A little late without any supporting evidence to project onto meanings of the alphabet 2-3 thousand years before? And in time to suspect an oriental influence of the Hindu/Arabic numeracy and the philosophical and religious aspects that came with it?

**** Well, we've a great difference between us.

You seem to think, that the fact, that the numerical value of the Hebrew word for heart "LB" formed the "32-idea" inside the SY. This is - please excuse - changing the logic of development in such a drastical manner, that it is - please excuse and don't take it as insult - simply creating ironical humour.

We've in the Chinese culture a 3000 years old proof, that the mathematical scheme of 2^6 can be taken very seriously by a complex and great culture which probably as much and more people involved as in all Europe, and that it proved successful to live still till modern times in the form of I-Ching and the theory of the Yin- and Yang as the basic structure of a complex theory of world and existence.
Now we've in a much smaller society with much less people the historical evidence (SY), that they also used in a personalised way the same scheme 2^6, which resulted in a specific expression "32 ways of wisdom". The mathematical scheme of the SY (3 + (1+6) +12) + (12 + 3 + 6) makes it clear, that the scheme jumps of the 2^6-strcture and not as stated by Kaplan from 2^5 with a mathematical security, which leaves perhaps a chance of 1:1000 for a possible misinterpretation but not more.

And still you seem to think, that a B and L at the begin of a specific text are the reason for the 32 in the SY?

Simply ... don't take it as insult ... you're funny. You're exchanging cause and result.
When the B... L - appearance inside the Torah must be respected as a conscious "sign" of the author, then it must must be interpreted, that the author of the Torah valued the scheme 2^6 very high and gave his evaluation expression by using B and L in the way he did.
I-Ching and the Elohist-part and the Jahwist-part of the Torah all were written in a similar time, around 1000 BC. Why do you think it strange, that both or all three authors knew about the 2^6-scheme and gave it a high value?
1000 BC is a time, when all cultures used memory-systems. If you know the mathematical parts of I-Ching, then you should be able to recognize, that there is no better memory-system than the basic structure of I-Ching - if you don't recognize it, then it's really not the problem of the authors of I-Ching and Torah, but the problem of your personal "I didn't understand the trick" or your personal "blind spot" in such matters.
Interestingly you're not alone with your misunderstanding. A whole culture of text-interpretators of SY are at your side. This doesn't change the facts, it just shows the greatness of this scandal: You're in error, and them, too.***


Your view in historical perspective seems to me to go against the available information. You also seem to choose to interpret the passage of SY1:15 against the pattern of the passages that precede it.

Why 1, 3, 6? The previous passages set up a pattern of 4/6 or possibly 2/2/6 but 1, 3, 6? Why? On what precedent?

**** If you're reading precisely SY, then you will know, why 1+3+6 is right. I don't have the text at hand in the moment. I can't cite the specific passage. 3 of the sephiroth are related to elements, the first not, the last 6 to directions in space.***

This is not to say yours or Autobis's exegesis is not of interest, but that in what you present so far IMHO there is not sufficient evidence to claim that this is the original intended point and that all other viewpoints are therefore wrong.

*** Well, quantity dominates quality, structure dominates contents - inside the world of systems. If you haven't understood that, what else you've not understood?
The I-Ching has 64 hexagrams, not 65 or 63. Why? It has a structure, a mathematical structure. The SY has 32 ways of wisdom, it cannot have 31 or 33, this would be nonsense. It has structure. The structure results in fixed numbers.

What have you understood, when you haven't understood the structure? I would say, it's impossible, that you understood much. You're just walking through the qualities. You're walking through the words which talk of the diamond. The words became more important as the diamond itself. And you don't like to realize that.
Normal I-Ching users are not different. They think, that the text is of importance, even better, they think, that the translations are of importance, although they are full of errors :) They mostly also don't find the way back in the structure, even when they've a mathematical background, they've difficulties to understand the difference between worthful and less worthful structural components. ***

BTW: For your information, you may or may not know, the oldest excavated synagogue in China has an inscription stating that the religion of of the Chinese 'religion' originated with sons of Abraham;)

**** It's known, that there were Jews in China around 700 BC, at leastthere a Jewish dictionaries, which state that as fact. Surely that's not the time of Abraham and a lot of people consider Abraham an hero of the islamic world - but who cares. The inscription is surely not of the days of Abraham ... :) ***
 

kwaw

Originally posted by Huck
The mathematical scheme of the SY (3 + (1+6) +12) + (12 + 3 + 6) makes it clear, that the scheme jumps of the 2^6-strcture and not as stated by Kaplan from 2^5 with a mathematical security, which leaves perhaps a chance of 1:1000 for a possible misinterpretation but not more.

kwaw: Why 1, 3, 6? The previous passages set up a pattern of 4/6 or possibly 2/2/6 but 1, 3, 6? Why? On what precedent?

If you're reading precisely SY, then you will know, why 1+3+6 is right. I don't have the text at hand in the moment. I can't cite the specific passage. 3 of the sephiroth are related to elements, the first not, the last 6 to directions in space.

SY 1:14
These are the Ten Sephiroth of Nothingness
The Ruach* of the Living God
Ruach from Ruach
Water from Ruach
Fire from Water
Up down east west north south.

*ruach may be interpreted as air, wind, breathe or spirit.

The first four flow from one to the other, the previous statements in the SY [1:3 and 1:5] which relate to the structure clearly and unambiguously give a structure of five pairs. Accordingly from the structure inicated by the text itself the first four should be considered as two pairs and the last six three pairs, giving 2,2,6, not 1, 3, 6.

What have you understood, when you haven't understood the structure?

But it is you who are ignoring the structure the text itself indicates in 1:3 and 1:5.

There is another way to get your 32 paths, and one achieved by following the instructions the SY [2:4] iself gives. Set the letters in a circle and pair each letter with each other letter. Just get a compass and ruler and do it, it is very simple. Do it methodically, starting with adjacent pairs, then every second pair, then every third and so on. The sign is 231 gates, the result is 10 circles and 22 radii, the 32 paths, derived not from binary exegesis, but the geometry of the circle.

Kwaw
 

Huck

Originally posted by kwaw
SY 1:14
These are the Ten Sephiroth of Nothingness
The Ruach* of the Living God
Ruach from Ruach
Water from Ruach
Fire from Water
Up down east west north south.

*ruach may be interpreted as air, wind, breathe or spirit.

The first four flow from one to the other, the previous statements in the SY [1:3 and 1:5] which relate to the structure clearly and unambiguously give a structure of five pairs. Accordingly from the structure inicated by the text itself the first four should be considered as two pairs and the last six three pairs, giving 2,2,6, not 1, 3, 6.

***** The SY knows 3 elements, not 4. The reason are mathematical reflections of the structure 2^6 - which - until now - you seem to avoid to study. Instead you prefer to argument out of a field, which you seem to be more familiar with.
The SY knows 3 elements, this appears also in the form of the 3 mothers.
Fire and Water are clearly mentioned above, Ruach of Ruach means the 3rd.
The "Ruach of the Living God" has a different quality. I think, this is recognizeable. 1-3-6 is the correct interpretation, especially as the later life-tree ended with a 3-6-1-scheme and not with a 2-2-6 or 2-6-2-scheme.
Of course you could think inside of the mathematical elements of I-Ching also of pairs:

11 is the pair of 00
01 is the pair of 10
------------------------
100 is the pair of 011
010 is the pair of 101
001 is the pair of 110

111 is the pair of 000 , but this is just identical with 11 - 00, so it is not necessary to count it. There are 5 pairs, of course, but this doesn't help to understand the 32 ways in their complete mathematical elegance and especially it is not very helpful to understand the structure of SY.

This is just that children-level, what Crowley perceived. But Crowley overlooked the "32 ways of wisdom" as a complete structure and equivalent to the 64 hexagrams. He cannot be taken very serious here in this theme.
****



But it is you who are ignoring the structure the text itself indicates in 1:3 and 1:5.

There is another way to get your 32 paths, and one achieved by following the instructions the SY [2:4] iself gives. Set the letters in a circle and pair each letter with each other letter. Just get a compass and ruler and do it, it is very simple. Do it methodically, starting with adjacent pairs, then every second pair, then every third and so on. The sign is 231 gates, the result is 10 circles and 22 radii, the 32 paths, derived not from binary exegesis, but the geometry of the circle.

**** I already commented it. The 231 gates refer to an additional mathematical game in SY. As it is not especially hidden or unexplored by the general research it deserves not my personal interest.
It's on a similar mathematical level as the mathematical game mentioned at SY 4.4, where the author talks of common permutation, "two stones build two houses, three build 6 houses, four build 24 houses, 5 build 120, 6 build 720, 7 build 5040", which is nothing else then

1x2 = 2
1x2x3 = 6
1x2x3x4 = 24
1x2x3x4x5 = 120
1x2x3x4x5x6 = 720
1x2x3x4x5x6x7 = 5040

refering to the number of words you can build with 2 letters, 3 letters, 4,5,6 and 7 letters.

A very humble mathematical reflection, no great mystery.

The really tricky things you miss. Although I already communicated them at least partly to you ... :)

Instead you try to keep up your teacher mission. Instead to control that, what was really the argument given by autorbis, you talk of your earlier successes in exploring the SY.

Well, it's nice that you got so far, that you understood that riddles. But with the reflections of autorbis you've simply another level of consideration. It's about that, what you did overlook. It's about your blind spot.

It still starts as simple as that:

(3 + (6+1) + 12) + (1+3+6) = 32
 

kwaw

Huck said:
***** The SY knows 3 elements, not 4. The reason are mathematical reflections of the structure 2^6 - which - until now - you seem to avoid to study. Instead you prefer to argument out of a field, which you seem to be more familiar with.
The SY knows 3 elements, this appears also in the form of the 3 mothers.
Fire and Water are clearly mentioned above, Ruach of Ruach means the 3rd.
The "Ruach of the Living God" has a different quality. I think, this is recognizeable. 1-3-6 is the correct interpretation, especially as the later life-tree ended with a 3-6-1-scheme and not with a 2-2-6 or 2-6-2-scheme.

This interpetation ignores the previous section, you are imposing it upon the text, not deriving it.

The ten sephiroth are five pairs: like a hand five against five. The first two are called beginning and end, the second good and evil, these first two give a set of 4, beginning and end, good and evil being kabbalisitically related, as discussed previously about the letter Beit and shin. Third, fourth and fifth, as pairs of directions, gives the second set of six, ergo 4,6. Each pair of opposite is a meris, that is it relates not only to the opposites but as signifying everything in between (eg as in 'everything between A to Z). LB is also a meris, meaning the first and last letters of the torah as symbol of everyting in between, the whole torah, the wise-heart.

The 3-6-1 scheme you mention is very much later, unrelated to your 1-3-6 and the SY. There is also a 1-2-3-4 scheme, but this is related to the four worlds and these are irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
 

Huck

kwaw said:
This interpetation ignores the previous section, you are imposing it upon the text, not deriving it.

The ten sephiroth are five pairs: like a hand five against five. The first two are called beginning and end, the second good and evil, these first two give a set of 4, beginning and end, good and evil being kabbalisitically related, as discussed previously about the letter Beit and shin. Third, fourth and fifth, as pairs of directions, gives the second set of six, ergo 4,6. Each pair of opposite is a meris, that is it relates not only to the opposites but as signifying everything in between (eg as in 'everything between A to Z). LB is also a meris, meaning the first and last letters of the torah as symbol of everyting in between, the whole torah, the wise-heart.

The 3-6-1 scheme you mention is very much later, unrelated to your 1-3-6 and the SY. There is also a 1-2-3-4 scheme, but this is related to the four worlds and these are irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

:) The 5+5-scheme appears in the text of SY, beside a note about 231 gates, beside a note about permutative letter-games, beside the basic partition of the 32 ways in 22 letters and 10 sephiroth.
The sephiroth itself are not only grouped in the 5+5-scheme, you're funny, and again the question arises, what you understood and what not.

The 6 directions naturally form a cube. The cube has three axis, each axis unites two directions, of course these 3 axis correspond to the 3 dimensions of space.
The cube has 1 center.
It should be possible for you to understand this idea. It gives a natural 1-3-6 scheme and it results from the same passage SY 1.5, if you look, what the object is.
"6 directions", this gives 3 dimensions in any natural accompanying mathematical world.

Of course you'll find, that double and mother letters mirror this space perception also (like the Sephiroth) of the SY. If you would understand the binary scheme of the 32 ways, you would also know, why .... but in the moment you're rather far of it. You seem to think, that the explanations (the text of SY) are the "true object" - no, the explanations only are intended to serve you to understand the object, as usual with other explanations. The "instruction for use" is only useful together with the object - you miss the object and keep the "instruction of use" as a "holy book" - you're funny, kwaw ... do not take this as insult, somehow I must find a way to wake you up. You're not especially funny as a person, but as part of a complex culture, which did its best to misunderstand the object of SY.
As a person I honour you, you seem to very knowledgeable in the field of Kabbala and the manuscripts of the persons who have spoken in the past their words to the theme - perhaps you know more than I do in this field, I enjoy that. But ...

The 3-6-1 patterns are older, much older than 12th century - you're funny again.

It's the common dialectical scheme, variously used in past times, not only in jewish contexts.

----- +/- Synthesis -------
- Antithesis ---- + Thesis
******************
+ - Antith. --- + + Thesis
--- + +/- Synthesis ------
*******************
- - Antith. ---- - + Thesis
---- - +/- Synthesis -----
*******************
------ Conclusio ----------

In older representations you do not necessarily have a pictorial representation of it - and when you have, you do not necessarily recognize it. The common Tetraktys-model for instance can be interpreted like this:

----- S
---- A T
-- T -C- A
- S A - T S

There is 10-elements system of Pythagoras, given by 10 word pairs.
There is a 10-categories system of Aristoteles.
The are various similar schemes inside Greek mythology.

And of course ít is inside the I-Ching-scheme.

The scheme can be given as 3-6-1 or 1-3-6 or 3-1-6 - it virtually changes anything and it's almost the same modell.

When you know the basis structure really, you also know, that the specific form of representation chosen by an author or philosoph or painter is not relevant: it serves as vehicle to transport an idea.

And your favoured LB ... or B as start letter and L as end letter.
It's only a symbol ... You're confused about it, with some right, as there is so much confusing stuff in books from authors, who also didn't understand the trick.

So let's think about the historical reality of the genesis of the Hebrew language.
There were 12 tribes .... or some less or some more, 12 looks like an idealised number. Do you think, that all 12 tribes spoke the same language? I would assume, not. Do you think, that their language already was stabilised by an alphabet or another writing system? I would say, once a situation happened, when the new adapted alphabet was merged with "common language" and that this situation offered a golden opportunity, which seldom appears in history and which existed only then in this extreme situation (of course there were other situations, but others were not comparable successful in history).

In this "golden opportunity" the possibility existed, that some clever heads invented words in an already existing language according to their number-value (which already existed in the "imported alphabet).
So these clever heads could cause number-tricks inside the Hebrew language. They could cause, for instance, that Adam (value 45) and Eve (value 19) have together 45 + 19 = 64 - which, if you've understood, what the 32 ways of wisdom really are (the binary scheme 2^6), was a "speaking number" to them.
They also could cause, that the word LB (one of the two shortest ways to express the number 32) got the meaning "heart" - they were in the position to create such words. They loved the system connected to the numbers 32 and 64, which later reappeared as "tradition" in the SY in a developed way, so they used the golden opportunity to structure the new written language that way. How far they went with this attempt we do not know - they had two sources simply, probably they couldn't influence language totally. But they were active enough to create a magical looking language, in which a lot of words have an inner number-meaning. For instance: Kether = crown = 620 = one of 9 of the shortest ways to present this number in Hebrew language.

Innocent people like you ... kwaw = 33 ... think, that the 620 comes from the name Kether, which is the usual explanation given in your specific books of so much great wisdom ... but, as with LB, it is of course a mathematical concept behind the curtain, which caused the word to display a specific message about the system used.

620 refers to a very complex system aspect, and kwaw, don't ask for it. Feel sure, that I'll not try to explain it to you, when you do not understand easier things.