Mysteries of Sepher Yetzirah

Huck

kwaw said:

I am curious of what anyone has made of this text and of their understanding of it. I am not interested in playing riddles or games or playng into individual delusions of grandeur and mysterious insights to which no one else is priviledged. If you want to post riddles I suggest you post over in the fun and games forum. If you want to share your insights, I am all ears.

Kwaw

Good.
It's nice that you display with clearity just that state of human mind, which leaves mysteries unexplored.

Actually this passiveness is part of the game. It explains, why there is such a deep error about the SY, although the hidden riddle isn't that difficult.

Of course the SY reacts as it always reacted, when meeting this special sort of human laziness and "not being curious". It doesn't tell its mystery.
It just waits upon somebody with a somewhat different talent.

The SY isn't very specific in that action. Research situations are always so, and usually even harder. In this case I was so friendly to tell you, that there is a riddle, in normal life and observation you must have instinct, a strange impression or .... a lot of experience in such matters to even get the idea, that there is a riddle at all.
This also explains, why this relatively harmless riddle stayed unexplored.

The situation is so, that one might assume, that the author of the Bahir still knew about it. Later one gets doubts and finally security, that the kabbalists doesn't know this specific aspect of SY.
Finally it ends with Aryeh Kaplan, who wrotes the more or less most informative text about the SY in recent time. And in his explanation about the first sentence of the text he explains (p. 10):

"The number 32 is the fifth power of 32" (which is not wrong, but a deplaced sentence, as the riddle of SY is not touched by this understanding).
"As the Sepher Yetzirah explains (1.5), the Ten Sefirot define a 5-dimensional space."
This is a delusion of the author. Not the Sepher Yetzirah explains at SY 1.5, that "the Ten Sefirot define a 5-dimensional space", it's only, that the author explains the passage at SY 1.5 in that way. Looking at the passage, there are really 5 dimensions, but only the normal 3 well-known dimensions of space, above/below, west/east and south/north; additionally 2 other dimensions, one of moral character, good/bad, and another dimension, that of time, given by the pair beginning/end.
Well, he just might expressed himself not very clever, so I leave this aside.

The next sentence shows the basic misunderstanding of Aryeh Kaplan:
"The 32 paths correspond to the number of apexes on a five dimensional hypercube."

WRONG. Author Aryeh Kaplan didn't got the trick. Researcher Kwaw probably also didn't got the trick, as he believes in Aryeh Kaplan.
Aryeh Kaplan refers to Saadia Gaon, "Commentary of Sefer Yetzirah", translated by Yosef Kapach (Jerusalem), p.34. This doesn't make it better, that he has an "authority" in the background. It's WRONG.
Aryeh Kaplan explains his position:
"That is not as difficult as it might seem" (wonderful, Aryeh Kaplan) and then he explains in length, what a 5-dimensional hypercube is (his description isn't wrong, but it doesn't help, cause he simply doesn't get, what the 32 ways really are he's talking about).

Good. Researcher Kwaw has demonstrated, that he obviously didn't spend enough time in the fun and riddle corner.

For Aryeh Kaplan: Life is difficult, when one doesn't understand the first sentence of a text correctly and immediately jumps to a
explanation, which doesn't fit the problem.



(3 + (1 + 6) + 12) + (1+3+6)

5-dimensional hypercube? You're funny.

That could mean the 5-dimensional hypercube:

1 + 5 + (5+5) + (5+5) + 5 + 1

Or that:

1 + 5 + (5+5)

Probably somebody wrote about the "16 ways of looking not precisely enough".
 

kwaw

Ten Sefiroth of Nothingness

In 14th century Italian the Latin word zefirum (or cefirum, as
Fibonacci called it) changed to zefiro [or zevero]. In the venetian
dialect this was shortened to zero, from whence it came into English. The latin word zefirum itself is derived from the Arabic root sifr, meaning empty, without anything or nothing. In French this became 'chiffre' which in English became 'cipher'. Cipher, though originally connected with the hindu/arabic zero, in time came to denote all 10 arabic/hindu numerals.

The Hebrew root [SPhR or SFR] can be found in several Hebrew words such as for example those we find in the Sefer Yetzira [SY]:

Books [Sepharim]
Text [Sepher]
Number [Sephar]
Communication [Sippur]
[SY 1:1]

And also of course Sefirot. The word Sefirot in the SY introduced a new noun into the hebrew language, meaning among other things 'counting'. According to Kaplan it is derived, like the English 'cipher' and 'zero', from the arabic a'sfr.

Outside of the SY, the oldest known reference to 'ten sefiroth of nothingness' is in a midrash of the latter half of the 8th century, when Hindu numbers had already been introduced into the arabic world. The age of the SY itself is estimated by most scholars as belonging to between the 2nd and 6th centuries c.e. Some date it as late as the 10th. In all probability there is an 'old' core text, maybe as old as the 2nd century. By intention or by error over the centuries it was added to or possibly commentaries included by error or intention of scibes. If the word 'sefirot' as used in the SY is connected to the arabic root a'sfr as translation for the hindu 'sunya' [zero], it is unlikely these references are prior to the 750's.

The connection with the Arabic root sifr (nothing) and Sefirot seems on one level of interpretation to be made particularly clear in the SY which explicitly and always refers to the Sefirot as "Ten Sefirot of Nothingness" [SY 1:2 et al, though it should be noted BLI MH has several alternate interpretations]. If also goes on to say [SY 1:4]:

Ten Sefirot of Nothingness
Ten and not Nine
Ten and not Eleven

On one level and perhaps the most obvious is that we simply interpret this as meaning that there are ten sefirot, no less and no more. On another level however I believe we could also interpret it as:

Ten not nine = 10-9 = 1
Ten not eleven = 10-11=-1
And 1-1=0

Thus reiterating the statement "Ten Sefirot of Nothingness".

"And before one, what do you count?" [SY 1:7]

The permutations of YHV within the text may also be interpreted in a similar fashion.

The symbol for zero is of course the circle [even in Greek times, a circle was used to denote the 'empty place' in positional notation used in astronomical tables of planets derived from the Babylonians - though there is no known connection between Greek use and the development of circle as zero in India], which Ben Ezra (1092-1167) in his Sefer haMispar (Book of Number) called in Hebrew Galgal [wheel/circle]. In the 'Mishnat HaMiddot' [c. 150 ce] Rabbi Nehemia says:

"There are four ways to grasp the roof [area], namely: the
quadrilateral, the trilateral, the bow [semi-circle] and the circle."

Notice that the four forms are in order of their boundary lines, 4,
3, 2 and the circle is one. To grasp the area of the circle
R. Nehemia says:

"How is it with the circle? Multiply the thread [diameter] into
itself, and throw away [subtract] from it one-seventh and the half of a seventh; the rest is the roof [area]. For example: The thread is extended to seven [ie, the diameter is seven units in length], its
multiplication into itself is 49; a seventh and half a seventh is ten
and a half; the area is thus 38 and 1/2."

Why is the thread extended to seven? That the circumference might give a whole number - twenty-two. Because the circumference of the circle was considered 22/7ths or 3 and 1/7th of the diameter.

Thus the number 22 was related to the geometry of the circle which cabbalistically is symbolic of both 'nothing' and 'all'. As the
circumference is 22/7ths [which we may relate to the 22 letters
of 'creation' of the Hebrew alphabet] so then the diameter is 7/7ths which we may relate to the seven days of creation [and all the numerous other '7' association].

So we have our number 22 from considering the geometry of the circle. The geometry of the circle in motion produces a decagram, a 10 sided figure [also connected with the 'golden section' and the 'golden triangles' castor and pollux). So we have in considering the geometry of the circle both 22 and 10. Within this ten sided figure within a circle we have the four golden degrees, 36, 72, 108 and 144 which are of course a form of the tetractys, ie 36 = 1/10th of the circle, 72=2/10, 108=3/10 and 144=4/10 and 1/10+2/10+3/10+4/10 = 10/10; and through the four levels of the tetractys we have derived from consideration of the circle the numbers 22,10,4.

It is also possible, as I have already explained, that by placing the 22 letters in a circle as instructed by the SY and pairing each letter, one derives not only 231 'gates' but 10 'sefiroth' and 22 'paths'. This is not explained in Kaplan, or in any commentary that I have read, but is simply deduced from carrying out the visualisations that the SY instructs you to do [and later checked out manually with a compass set, as I didn't trust my powers of visualisation with such a complex image].

Kwaw
 

kwaw

Some notes/speculations on YHV/IAO

According to Blavatsky:
Says Furst: "The very ancient name of God, Yaho, written in the Greek law, appears, apart from its derivation, to have been an old mystic name of the Supreme deity of the Shemites. Hence it was told to Moses when he was initiated at Hor-eb -- the cave -- under the direction of Jethro, the Kenite (or Cainite) priest of Midian. In an old religion of the Chaldeans, whose remains are to be found among the Neo- Platonists, the highest divinity, enthroned above the seven heavens, representing the Spiritual Light-Principle . . . . and also conceived of as Demiurgus,* was called Iao (YHV), who was, like the Hebrew Yaha, mysterious and unmentionable, and whose name was communicated to the Initiated. The Phoenicians had a Supreme God, whose name was
trilateral and secret, and he was Iao [YHV]." (Isis Unveiled, Vol.
II., p. 298.)

"In the Ophite gems of King ("Gnostics") we find the name of IAO
repeated, and often confounded with that of Jevo, while the latter
simply represents one of the genii antagonistic to Abraxas. But the name IAO neither originated with, nor was it the sole property of the Jews. Even if it had pleased Moses to bestow the name upon the tutelary "Spirit," the alleged protector and national deity of the "chosen people of Israel," there is yet no possible reason why other nationalities should receive Him as the Highest and One-living God. But we deny the assumption altogether. Besides, there is the fact that Jaho or Iao was a "Mystery name" from the beginning, for and JHVH and YH never came into use before King David. Anterior to his time, few or no proper names were compounded with Iah or Jah. It looks rather as though David, being a sojourner among the Tyrians and Philistines (2 Samuel), brought thence the name of Jehovah. He made Zadok high priest, from whom came the Zadokites or Sadducees. He lived and ruled first at Hebron , Habir-on or Kabeir-town, where the rites of the four (mystery-gods) were celebrated. Neither David nor Solomon recognized either Moses or the law of Moses. They aspired to build a temple to YHVH, like the structures erected by Hiram to Hercules and Venus, Adon and Astarte." (The secret Doctrine, Vol II, pg 541).

The use of the permutations of YHV to 'seal space' in the SY is reminiscent of the use of the name IAO in some Christian gnostic texts, for example:

"Thomas, Andrew, James and Simon the Canaanite were in the West, with their faces turned towards the East, but Philip and Bartholomew were in the South with their faces turned towards the North, but the other disciples and the women disciples stood behind Jesus . . . And Jesus cried out, turning towards the four corners of the world with his disciples. . . and said: Iao, Iao, Iao. . ."

[Carl Schmidt: 'Gnostic Writings' quoted in G.Scholem's 'Origins of the Kabbalah]

Within Greek gnosticism as synethism occurs with Jupiter as IAO-Pater, which is cognate with the Hebrew YHVAL (YHV + AL), an ancient name of Metatron, Prince of the Divine Presence
charged by God to Grant Abraham's every wish.

"Why is Abraham blessed with all things? Because he has no daughter answered the first Rabbi. But he has a daughter said the second Rabbi, she is called Bakol (BKL = 'in all things'). Who is the daughter who is 'in all things'? His daughter is the Shekinah, Shekinah Bakol." [Sefer HaBahir]

Note BKL = 52 and YHVAL also = 52.
ABA VAMA (Father+Mother) also = 52 (and AIMA=52, too)
ALIHV, Elihu - the Fourth Counselor in Job, and the Wise Youth = 52
also the YVD HH VV HH, Tetragrammaton of Assiah = 52
BN [son] also = 52

All of this seems to point to something that Chaim Vital transcribed from the Ari'zl:

[Meditation and Kabbalah, by Aryeh Kaplan pg. 238]
"The Tetragrammaton adding up to 52 (Ben) then elevates the Feminine Waters through the Nefesh of the saint. This is associated with Malkhut-Kingship (the Female Partzuf)."

In the pagan gnosticism of hellenistic Egypt IAO was
associated with the divine Father/Mother/Son trinity Isis/Osiris and Horus (which we may find reflected in the kabbalistic attributions of the name YHV to Chokmah, Binah and Tipharet as Father/Mother and Son). Crowley made a syzygy between IAO and Father/Mother/Son, and also between IAO and the virgin/womb and holy spirit. In this respect we may reference the Greek (though probably of Egyptian origin) myth of Io.

Impreganted by Zeus (air god, air/spirit [ruach] attributed to
Aleph/Alpha) in the form of a bull (Aleph-ox, also latin and greek A
said to derive from the phoenician glyph for a bull). Hence IAO here equates to IO [virgin/womb ?]impregnated by A (air/spirit/breath in form of Bull). 'A' here as well as relating to the divine Father also references the divine Child Harpocrates (Horus the Child). Io escapes the wrath of Juno by escaping into Egypt in the form of a cow.

The ATU 'high priestess' / 'juno' appear to me to
incorporate elements of this myth, and also as Sophia, wisdom, ther higher Shekinah [ISIS as wisdom was of course identified with the TORAH in Rabinnical Judaism, and with the 'church' in Christianity, both of which have been offered as possible interpretations of the papess, priestess Atu].

It may be relavant to note that just as YHVH is said to represent
that which was, is and will be so we may interpret the name IAO.

IAO is the latin transliteration of the three Greek letters Iota,
symbolising the eternal present, Alpha, which represented the past creation of all things, and Omega, the end. ( according to Hypattius of Alexandria).

In the pre-massoretic period the letters Y, H and V though drawn
from the 'simple' letters, may themselves be considered double in
that they may represent vowels as well as consonants. Traditionally [in pythagorean theory] the vowels are considered to be connected to the soul, a tradition carried on within kabbalistic tradition that has passed over into popular numerology. The consonants relate to the physical and manifest. Yod, Hei and Vau therefore, as being both vowels and consonants, may be interpreted as representing the body and soul, spirit and matter, being bound together.

We may relate them to the concept of the septeniary, the
number seven as a sacred number. In this respect we view the number seven as the sum of three and four. Three (the triangle) represents the supernal spirit, four (the square) the manifest. This is related to three dimensional space in that four points are required to reference three dimensions [the tetrahedra, in which the fourth point lies outside of the plane, perhaps more accurately demonstrates the relationship between the number four, the solid and three dimensional space; however in two dimensional geometry the square is the symbol].

To demontrate the concept in a pictogram we may visualise the
triangle inside of the square. The supernal (the triangle) bound to
the manifest (the square).

YHV is related to the septeniary in that it adds to 21 (3x7). Twentry-one is a sixth level triangular number , ie;

1
2 3
4 5 6
7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21

Note the relationship between triangular and square numbers, ie, the triangular numbers 1, 3, 6, 10, 15, 21, the sum of any two adjacent triangular numbers = the square of the higher; e.g 1+3=4 the square of the second triangular number, 3+6=9, the square of the third, 6+10=16, the square of the fourth etc]. The second number is said to make manifest the abstaction of the first, or if you prefer the second is the body or incarnation of the soul of the first - in this note that the word Galgal - wheel/circle - is connected with kabbalistic concepts of reincarnation.

[Note also the connection with the traditional middoth puzzle 1=2, 2=3, 3=4. Also the common didactic and rhetorical devise of using ascending numners in canaanite literature [re; several examples are in the bible], 1 and/or 2, 2 and/or 3, 3 and/or 4 etc. Any connection here with the english hermetic tarot attributions? At the least it shows the hermetic attributions are not neccesarily 'anachronistic'!?]

The sixth level we attribute to the hexagram. Write the numbers 1-6 in the wings of the hexagram and the numbers in opposing wings add up to 7 (1+6, 2+5 and 3+4) [like the dots on opposite sides of the dice]. These relate to the seven directions (above, below; east, west; south, north and centre). If we use two hexagrams numbered 1-6 and 5-10 and join them at wings 5 and 6 [so we have a figure with 10 wings numbered 1-10], note that the numbers in the upper hexagram total 21, YHV, the lower 45, ADM (re: and man [male and female] was made in the likeness of G-d? As Above, So Below?). 21 [yhv] + 45 [adm] = 66 [glgl - Galgal, the wheel of incarnation].

Astrologically we may note the attributions Yod=Virgo, Hei=Aries and Vau =Virgo. The distance between 0virgo and 0aries is 150 degrees, connect lines around around a circle every 150 degrees and you end up with a 12 pointed star. The distance between 0aries and 0taurus is 30 degrees. Connect a line between points round a circle every 30 degrees and you end up with a 12 sided figure. YHV therefore describes through these astrological attributions the geometric symbol of a 12 pointed star within a 12 sided figure. Twelve of course is 3x4, again the triangle and square, the spirit bound to matter. We may represent it as a triangle inside a square inside a pentagon (3+4+5=12).

[You may observe that such geometric projections could be carried on infinitely, the outer figure getting ever closer to the figure of a circle. The circle in this case would symbolise the set limit of infinity. This circle we may call Galgal (wheel), which is
also 'zero' (cipher or sefer).]

Also 150+30=180, the sum of the angles of a triangle; or, 150-30=120, the number of degrees of a trine aspect in astrology. Yod-Virgo is a mutable sign, Hei-Aries is a cardinal sign and Vau-Taurus is a fixed sign. We may describe four astrological trinities (mutable/cardinal/fixed) as follows:

In the Eastern Quarter - Pisces/Aries/Tuarus [I am, me, mine];
In the Northern Quarter - Gemini/Cancer/Leo [We are, we, ours];
In the Western Quarter - Virgo/Libra/Scorpio [You are, you, yours]:
In the Southern Quarter - Sagittarius/Capricorn/Aquarius [They are,
they, theirs].

The hermetic elemental attributions of the name YHVH also of course unpack into an astrological 12 pointed star.

In brief summary the name YHV [Iaho or IAO] may possibly be
interpreted on one level as being a code for the mystical signifance of the Septeniary or more generally of the tranformations of the three and the four as applying to the concept of the binding of body and soul, spirit and matter, abstract [triangular numbers] and manifest [square numbers].

Kwaw
 

Huck

Back to the mystery

:) Kwaw,

nice, that you present with patience all these wonderful kabbalistc mysteries, which nearly all have the merit to be not part of the content of the Sepher Yetzirah.

Sorry, that I say it so clearly, actually you do react like an automat. I speak of the "mystery of SY" and you seem to understand "mystery", thinking, that you've a full sack of things, which once in your mental life had been connected to the term "mystery" and then you blast my monitor full with your mysteries, intelligent like a search-engine.

I spoke of "mysteries of SY". Mystery in this specific context means to me very clearly "at least a mystery to kwaw". And "mysteries of SY" means to me really "mysteries, which are indicated in the text of SY itself", it means not "mysteries, which are indicated in the texts of persons which claimed to comment the SY, but in whose texts it is not clear, to which specific sentence of SY their commentary belong".
They only talk of a horse, that I don't see.

Then I spoke of Aryeh Kaplan (see my post two posts above) and about his statement to the first sentence of SY, that the "32 ways of wisdom" should be explained by a 5-dimensional hyper-cube.

Kaplan: "The 32 paths correspond to the number of apexes on a five dimensional hypercube."

And I noted to this: WRONG.

And I repeat it, as clear it is possible. This specific object "the 32 ways of wisdom", of which the first sentence of the SY speaks, are NOT a symbolic expression of something, which looks like
"a 5-dimensional hypercube".
Aryeh Kaplan has done a lot of good things in his book about Sepher Yetzirah, no doubt, but in his interpretation of this specific 1st sentence of SY, which has a fundamental importance for the whole text, he presents the one very great error in later kabbalistical teachings about the SY.

Kwaw, listen precisely:

It is WRONG.

The main content of SY, the "32 ways of wisdom", is NOT the representation of a 5-dimensional hypercube.
Kwaw, get it: Kaplan can say so, any other kabbalistical authority, you may cite, can say so, you can say so, this doesn't change reality: IT IS NOT

And this is one side of the mystery of SY: the big error about it.

And the second side of the mystery of SY is the really content of SY and its "32 ways of wisdom".

It's not about the 5-dimensional hypercube, it's very simply about the:

6-DIMENSIONAL HYPERCUBE

Perhaps somebody reading this thread isn't clear about the term 5 or 6-dimensional hypercube.
It's just a simple mathematical structure, which you nowadays are used to describe as 5- or 6-bit-system.

"0 or 1" or "Yes and No" at 5 or 6 levels are a 5 or 6-dimensional hypercube.

For instance: The basic-structure of I-Ching is a 6-dimensional hypercube.

So, do you understand, what I indirectly say?
I say, that the "32 ways of wisdom" do present a description of a mathematical body, which is also used for the I-Ching.

I could go a little more in detail and state, that the "32 Ways of Wisdom" describe the I-Ching. Of course not the oracle "I-Ching", but the mathematical body, which is the base of I-Ching.

You want an explanation? Here it is:

32 = (3 + (1+6) + 12) + (1 + 3 + 6)


Of course there is a trick inside, otherwise it wouldn't be a "mystery", otherwise the error about it wouldn't exist.
 

Huck

post of autorbis in 1996

The following was posted by autorbis 8 years back in alt.tarot. The context was another post of minor importance involving DNS and Amino-acids (going back to an older theory of Martin Schönfelder, that the structure of the DNS has something to do with the I-Ching. Autorbis wasn't very used to write in English language at that time, please excuse that:

Quote

"In the last weeks there was a discussion about a relationship between I-Ching
and Tarot (based on DNS and amino acids involving Sepher Yetzirah) in the
newsgroup "alt. tarot".

There is a "Sepher Yetzirah - I-Ching connection" , although it should be seen
different from the objects in the noted discussion, because one needs no
knowledge of DNS and amino acids at all to see this connection.

I'll demonstrate it to you in the following text. Please consider that I do
write in a foreign language, I just hope, I can avoid misunderstandings.

It might be necessary to give some short informations to a rather small book in
Hebrew language, which is estimated to have appeared first in 1st - 5th century
AD, called SEPHER YETZIRAH or "Book of Creation". There are different versions
of this text, ranging in their length from 1300 words until 2500 words. 4
different versions (including one original) you can find in "Sepher Yetzirah"
from Aryeh Kaplan, Samuel Weiser, Inc, 1993.
The object of the book are "32 ways of wisdom" which with God created the
world. 22 of this ways are connected to the Hebrew alphabet, 10 are connected
to the socalled Sephiroth (the numbers from 1 to 10). Also involved are
astrological symbols, parts of the human body, a sort of letter-combinatoric
and someting, which looks a little bit like a linguistic Hebrew grammar. The
text concludes with the note, that the biblical Abraham received this teachings
from God somehow claiming the author to be Abraham.
The system shown in the book got a big carreer in the following Hebrew mystic,
especially in the historical Kabbala, which started around 1170 AD. There are
more than 50 old commentaries on the book. Its strong influence even reached
the Western esoterical interpretation of the Kabbala, finally it was related to
the Tarot game with its 22 major arcana by Eliphas Levi and the Golden Dawn in
the 19th century. In this form it is still very active, as you can see it in
the various forms of Tarot games and their astrological attributions, which in
most cases go back to the SY.

This is the basic sorting of the 32 ways:

22 letters: 3 "mothers",
connected to the elements fire, water, air
7 "double letters"
connected to the planets
seen as a 6+1 structure
12 "simple letters"
connected to the signs of the zodiac

10 numbers 1 spirit of god
3 breath, water, fire
6 directions of space

which leads to the SY-formula:

(3 + (6+1) + 12) + (1 + 3 + 6) = 22 + 10 = 32

In the following it will be demonstrated, that this same formula appears in the
mathematical structure of the I-Ching (only regarding the 64 hexagrams, not the
technic of divination and change):

****************************************************

THE CONNECTION

You can connect I-Ching and SY,

1. because both theories are based on the same mathematical structure

2. because both theories tend to be philosophical explanations, how "Vielheit"
erased from "Einheit" or multiplicity erased from oneness; so there is a
similarity of intention.

How to do it:

1.
The objects of the I-Ching are the 64 hexagrams.
The objects of the SY are the 32 ways of wisdom.

You can transform the 64 hexagrams in 32 objects by uniting the complementary
hexagrams (in my example 1 shall be a yang-line, 0 shall be a yin line, I write
them horizontally, and the first 1 or 0 shall be the first line)

So: 111111 unites with 000000
011111 unites with 100000
001111 unites with 110000
111000 unites with 000111 etc

By this operation you gain 32 objects on both sides. Btw, it is the only one
operation to reach this goal (change the 64 to a 32) sufficiently.

2.
The SY parts the 32 symbols in a group of 22 letters and 10 Sephiroth.
The 32 I-Ching-hexagram-pairs are partable in a group with 22 "unbalanced
hexagramm-pairs" and 10 "balanced hexagram-pairs".

"Balanced" means, that the pair consists of 2 hexagrams, that have each 3 yang
and 3 yin
"Unbalanced" means that the pair consists of 2 hexagrams, that have different
numbers of yin- and yang-lines (6-0 or 5-1 or 2-4)

3.
The SY now separates the 2 main groups in different parts:

10: 1 spirit of god
3 breath, water, fire
6 directions

22: 3 mother letters
7 (=6+1) double letters
12 simple letters

(If you have any doubts about 7=6+1, please control Aryeh Kaplan, SY, short
version, chapter 4,3)

So the formula of SY is:

(1 + 3 + 6) + (3 + (6 + 1) + 12) = 10 + 22 = 32

You can achieve now the same mathematical formula, if you part the 32 hexagramm
pairs by the following way. The instrument of generation is a "rolling process"
(the last line is repeated as the first line etc.)

This is the "rolling process":

101010 100000
010101 010000
101010 001000
etc. 000100
000010
000001
100000
etc.

(as you can see in this example, the rolling process leads to a recycling
structure; normally one group has 6 elements, but there are some special
structures)

By the following way the I-Ching presents the same formula as the SY:

101010 010101 (= 1 Sephira, spirit of god)

111000 000111 (= 3 Sephiroth, elements)
011100 100011
001110 110001

010110 101001 (= 6 Sephiroth, directions)
001011 110100
100101 011010
110010 001101
011001 100110
101100 010011

100100 011011 (= 3 mother letters)
010010 101101
001001 110110

111111 000000 (= 7=6+1 double letters)
-------------------------
011111 100000
101111 010000
110111 001000
111011 000100
111101 000010
111110 000001

110000 001111 (= 12 simple letters; two "rolling processes" are
united)
101000 010111
011000 100111
010100 101011
001100 110011
001010 110101
000110 111001
000101 111010
000011 111100
100010 011101
100001 011110
010001 101110

So both systems, I-Ching and SY, present the same formula according to the
fact, that both are related to the same mathematical structure. It is rather
improbable, that a feature like "(1 + 3 + 6) + (3 + (6 + 1) + 12) = 10 + 22 =
32 appear accidently and without connecting mathematical reason in two
different systems.

*****************************************************************************

If you have trouble to understand it, maybe it's best to print it out and try
again. It is hard to get it reading at the computer.

Some conclusions:

No intellectual insight in the structure of the DNS and the connected amino
acids, which both, author of I-Ching and author of SY, probably didn't possess,
is necessary to connect the both theories.

I think, that the mathematical structure, which is used by I-Ching and SY, is a
very simple and natural one. Also it was natural for the DNS to act according
to this most simple structure.
So it is also not necessary to assume, that there had been any communicative
connection between the author of I-Ching and the author of SY. Both authors
simply used the same structure. But as the structure is the same and the
meditations of the authors followed in their ideas the underlying structure,
there is more than one similarity between the both systems.

The Tarot game was invented in 15th century in a different context. The reason
to chose the number 22 as number of the major arcana was different to the
intellectual model of the SY-author and the I-Ching-author.
When in 19th century Tarot was connected "artfully" to the SY, a new system
arose. From this point on one could assume a connection between I-Ching and
Tarot - but it is a creative game and the world is, what you want, that it is.
The I-Ching has no pictures, and by the way, the Chinese had no alphabet. And
the author of SY probably didn't thought of divination, although his probable
source, the priests of David, cared about it, and their binary use of Urim and
Tunnim (oracle stones) might have led them to adopt the same mathematical
formula.
Although the author of SY probably wrote in the centurys after Christ, the
author couldn't have invented the 22 letters and the 10 fingers. This simple
logic leads to the question, if the inventor of the Hebrew alphabet already had
the system in his mind, when he choose the number 22 as the ordering number of
his new invention. Then you are in a time around 1500 BC. Although there is the
possibility, that he accidently (or because of linguistic reasons) took this
number, the probability of an adoption of a scheme that was already known to
him from another context (maybe as a divination-scheme, maybe as a
memory-system) is high.

Actually Aleister Crowley or other authors active in Tarot probably didn't know
about the connection between I-Ching and SY or about the mathematical base of
SY.
Some of the kabbalists might have had knowledge about the mathematical base of
SY, but I consider, that - if - there had been only few and they were very
early in time. After the kabbala became famous and therefore connected to all
and everything, I think, people were not able to look at the very simple start
of it.

The use of the scheme is already detectable in Old Egyptia, also in the bible,
also in Greek Mythology (although in a modified form). And in other cultures.
It was just a very common structure in older times, but became in the Western
world lost in later generations. It is a very good system, useful as divination
tool or memory system. Divination systems and memory systems lost their meaning
with the invention of Monotheism and scripture, this should be the reason.

I detected the relationship myself in 1974 and since that time never found a
book or an author, who really did understand it (although there were some, who
explained to know something about it; for instance Crowley).

Lothar
 

kwaw

Re: Back to the mystery

Huck said:
:) Kwaw,


Kwaw, listen precisely:

It is WRONG.



I have never even mentioned it, so why shout at me?. There are many 'mysteries' to the SY, many that have developed over the centuries by a variety of forms of exegesis that lead to readings that may or may not be related to the original intention of the author, but which nonetheless are a part of its kabbalistic development and of its importance to an understanding of the history of the kabbalah and the 'occult' [including the 'occult' versions of tarot].


For instance: The basic-structure of I-Ching is a 6-dimensional hypercube.

So, do you understand, what I indirectly say?
I say, that the "32 ways of wisdom" do present a description of a mathematical body, which is also used for the I-Ching.

I could go a little more in detail and state, that the "32 Ways of Wisdom" describe the I-Ching. Of course not the oracle "I-Ching", but the mathematical body, which is the base of I-Ching.

[/b]


Yes, I read about the analagies between I ching and kabbalah in the works of Aleister Crowley before I was even thirteen. So what is the mystery you are going on about? Are you saying the analagy is proof of a shared source? I would agree, that source being the nature of the human mind and the nature of number. Does the analogy negate any other understanding or traditional interpretation and make them wrong? I don't think so.

Well thanks for your 'revelation'. Perhaps my dissappointment derives not so much from the content, but the natural response to anything that has been over 'hyped' and turns out like a hollywood movie to be a familiar story.

Kwaw
 

jmd

Further and different mysteries in the SY and the I-Ching.

As again I will probably not have the time over the next couple of weeks to carefully go through some of the posts, I may take longer to contribute to various developments than I would like to.

Again, it is also worthy of note that there are a few threads on the Q/C/Kab(b)alah in the subscriber area which are also worth reading.

With regards to the Sefer Yetzirah and the thirty-two paths of wisdom, I personally think that much has been made to strive to achieve a numerical solution to something which may not have been. After all, the paths of wisdom are contained within that which begins with B=2 and ends with L=30, hence thirty-two - ie, the Torah.

It is indeed fascinating that the binary-hexagrammes of the I-Ching can be paired in ways mentioned, giving 32 + 32. It is also fascinating that if one looks at the I-Ching as full hexagrammes and treat each reversable pair as one image (as on a card, and hence viewable from either up-down or down-up position), these 64 reduce to not thirty-two, but thirty-six 'archetypal' hexagrammes (in this example, 100111 & 111001 are the two views of an image, the one the reverse of the other).

When one considers the letters of the Hebrew Alef-Beit, again we achieve not only twenty-two, but thirty-six if we consider each instance of the dageshed/non-dageshed (hard/soft double), and the final forms (some again as dageshed/non-dageshed).

Each, placed in a circle (as suggested by the SY) then occupies 10 degrees (decans in astrology). But even more importantly, the 'basic' twenty-two gives us a golden angle: 360 / ([1+ 5^(1/2)]/2) = 222.5 degrees, ie, about 220 degrees. Per ten degrees therefore giving 22 positions.

Of these, the Mothers of the SY are placed at the major Fibonacci positions which gives the sequence golden proportions, with the first, thirteenth and twenty-first locations clearly implied. The twenty-second, as for the Tarot for those who place the Fool as last, becomes the last letter which walks off into the distance and keeps the sequence moving onwards.

I write this for here too I present what, to my knowledge, has not been presented publicly prior to my doing so sometime in the last ten years (and on Aeclectic in an even more succinct form in another thread). What is interesting is that both sacred geometry, the Golden proportion, the Fibonacci sequence (of course all these are related) and both the Hebrew letters and various small hints in the SY may each be joined together in Midrash-style mathematical exegesis.

Working with 32 and with 62, both being powers of the binary (2^5 & 2^6 respectively), we are bound to discover important mathematical elements. Whether these were consciously seen and understood by the respective developers/authors of the SY and the far earlier I-Ching is probably, to my way of thinking, not as important that these discoveries may be added to our store of knowledge and provide for further reflection and insights.

With regards to 32 being a fifth dimentional cube, then, there is in fact merit, and I for one do not see why Huck claims that 32 does not 'correspond' (using Kaplan's term) to the vertices (corners) of a 5-D cube. Certainly, if implied that this was the intended meaning of the SY, then it is unlikely, but I certainly did not read Kaplan in that manner, but as providing mathematical Midrash/exegesis.

Thanks for posting those alt.Tarot posts from autorbis - I personally thoroughly enjoyed the correlations made and the relative simplicity in which what may take pages to outline was clearly expressed.
 

Huck

for Kwaw

Dear Kwaw,

Kwaw wrote: "Yes, I read about the analagies between I ching and kabbalah in the works of Aleister Crowley before I was even thirteen. "

If you read the text of autorbis carefully, you'll see, that he reflects the informations given by Crowley in a specific way.

Generally: Books like SY and I-Ching have already proven their patience with the understanding and not-understanding of their researchers - even if it is 1000 years or more.

Obviously they'll endure also some more time - if necessary.
 

Huck

jmd said:

Working with 32 and with 62, both being powers of the binary (2^5 & 2^6 respectively), we are bound to discover important mathematical elements. Whether these were consciously seen and understood by the respective developers/authors of the SY and the far earlier I-Ching is probably, to my way of thinking, not as important that these discoveries may be added to our store of knowledge and provide for further reflection and insights.

With regards to 32 being a fifth dimentional cube, then, there is in fact merit, and I for one do not see why Huck claims that 32 does not 'correspond' (using Kaplan's term) to the vertices (corners) of a 5-D cube. Certainly, if implied that this was the intended meaning of the SY, then it is unlikely, but I certainly did not read Kaplan in that manner, but as providing mathematical Midrash/exegesis.


Hi JMD,

there is a huge difference between 2^5 and 2^6, once mathematically and second, if you apply it specifically to SY.

2^5 tells you almost nothing, 2^6 tells you so much, that you get difficulties to gather it.

A "Way of Wisdom", as it is explained in the 2^6 interpretation, is the union of two complementary opposites, which makes sense - when you've a picture, what wisdom is. Wisdom means to unite opposing forces.
Mathematical logic will it, that there are 32 of such complementary pairs inside the mathematical body created by 2^6.

The SY is basically about the cube-model, which becomes apparent at various places in the text, when it is talked about top/below, north/south, east/west.

A cube has 6 sides, not 5.

Kaplan, but not only Kaplan, just the "tradition", he refers to, simply don't meet the main object of SY. This misunderstanding of the object, which is told about, is a very creative act, especially in the combination, when a culture assumes, that the SY is an authoritative text. Comparable creative as the errors about the origin of Tarotcards ...

Then the energy to "explain" is very great and then "explanations" are born en masse, which have nothing, but nothing to do with the original intention of the author. All these explanations have the tendency to mingle together in the heads of people like Kwaw, who have to live then with all these words of these "authorities" and "in all directions exploding worlds"- and they believe them, usually without the personal energy to break the seal of the wrong start. ... they can talk endlessly of their considerations.

The "world of error" is - cause the simple multiplying factor of error - of course much greater and at first sight more impressive than the "world of simple truth".

But "simple truth" is really rich. It knows about the "back to start"-button, at least in this specific context - for instance :)
 

Ross G Caldwell

I can see the powers of 2 having realizations in all systems -

2 - binary, flip a coin, yes-no
4 - four elements, tetragram of geomancy and Ifa
http://www.innerx.net/personal/tsmith/VodouPhysics.html
8 - directions
16 - Geomantic figures
32 - paths of wisdom
64 - hexagrams of I Ching
128 - ?
256 - Odu of Ifa

Huck, why doesn't 32 (2^5) tell us much?