Proof of Divine Providence
-
@Takamba said
"
@Jason R said
"
@Takamba said
"FOX = 666. I've seen this Qabalah before. Can't remember where, but at least it demonstrates this has been discovered before."Well I did put this in my other post as "FOX English Qabalah". I made that up lol. Look at my other post, maybe that's where you remember it from. Ive never heard of it before otherwise, and love to see it if it was done before!"
Turns out there's more than one way to make FOX=666, I probably saw it the other way years ago - which is why I don't remember it, I tend toward dismissing certain silliness (not your topic, the FOX = 666 from before)."
Hmmm interesting, never heard of it. Thanks though, I still may peek at it, yet I trust your judgement.
-
Thank you for elucidating your system in more detail. I'm still digesting the material; I'll give a longer critique later. So far my thoughts are: interesting and impressive, but inconclusive.
The Book, as I understand it, has a subtlety that corresponds to that of the reader. While I feel that your findings are interesting and thought-provoking, I feel that there is still a great deal left unanswered. What I see is an intelligent mind working sincerely on the problems presented by the Book of the Law. I don't think that you've answered any questions conclusively, however. Nor am I certain your findings establish "proof of divine providence."
I'll give my final analysis later. But whatever the case, I can encourage you to keep working in the same direction. "A tree will be known by its fruits."
-
@Mephis said
"Thank you for elucidating your system in more detail. I'm still digesting the material; I'll give a longer critique later. So far my thoughts are: interesting and impressive, but inconclusive.
The Book, as I understand it, has a subtlety that corresponds to that of the reader. While I feel that your findings are interesting and thought-provoking, I feel that there is still a great deal left unanswered. What I see is an intelligent mind working sincerely on the problems presented by the Book of the Law. I don't think that you've answered any questions conclusively, however. Nor am I certain your findings establish "proof of divine providence."
I'll give my final analysis later. But whatever the case, I can encourage you to keep working in the same direction. "A tree will be known by its fruits.""
In the end, no matter what, I am not here to shove it down throats. Do what thou wilt. However, realize of course the above is a brief sketch, enough I figure, to show something higher at work. The proof being in the statistical unlikeliness of these consistent symbolic results.
I accept your findings, but with the point that you have not proven me wrong either. Of course the verses hold personal meaning, however, I feel they have an ingenious magical quality to have layers of potential meaning. I again say, my conclusion for proof rests in these results not being the product of chance. My demand is to be shown a comparable example of such findings. Can you demonstrate something like this that provides similar numbers in the same amount of steps and just as relevant to the riddles?
Anyway, thank you for your opinion, and taking the time! That alone is awesome of you and appreciated!
-
P.S.
A further tid-bit, I believe the TRUE arrangement for these numbers are "left to right and top to bottom", which is a secret hidden in the line drawn clue. This changes the cards blended within certain elements, for example, 0 & 13 (Aleph & Nun 51) at the then top left corner, which is then in "Air of Air". Like the Enochian, there were some blinds I believe. There really is a lot to share, more results, but ANYONE with a basic knowledge in Qabalah & magic can find these, IF they truly take the time to investigate. That's the problem however, not many are motivated with some "nobodys" apparent "idea" lol.
-
Once I`ve read something from a shaman that I find amazing.
“Everything has a spirit, but not all spirits have power”
Since a do not take riddle stuff seriously (as I do not take most thinks seriously), the question I believe that should be asked is:
Does it have power?
If yes, you got something.
-
@Faus said
"Once I`ve read something from a shaman that I find amazing.
“Everything has a spirit, but not all spirits have power”
Since a do not take riddle stuff seriously (as I do not take most thinks seriously), the question I believe that should be asked is:
Does it have power?
If yes, you got something."
Try it. My own answer, and here I can only talk about MY experience, is an emphatic YES! I know (for me at least) it has power. However, of course one can give anything power for themselves if they believe in it. The question here is, does it have objective power? I say TRY IT! Look into it, study it, and see for yourself. Speaking for myself only, I have MY proof of providence and its relevence, but I feel it goes beyond just my own sphere.
-
@Jason R said
"
my own answer, and here I can only talk about MY experience, is an emphatic YES! I know (for me at least) it has power. "So harness the power of your discovery and be the living example of its power. Success is my proof.
@Jason R said
"I say TRY IT! Look into it, study it, and see for yourself. Speaking for myself only, I have MY proof of providence and its relevence, but I feel it goes beyond just my own sphere."
Already tried scrying at it? Calling its power? What new knowledge comes from this new table? What heavens and hells are commanded by its power?
Mathematic tricks are cool, but some interesting answers for these questions would it make worth investigating. Otherwise, why bother? -
@Faus said
"
@Jason R said
"
my own answer, and here I can only talk about MY experience, is an emphatic YES! I know (for me at least) it has power. "So harness the power of your discovery and be the living example of its power. Success is my proof.
@Jason R said
"I say TRY IT! Look into it, study it, and see for yourself. Speaking for myself only, I have MY proof of providence and its relevence, but I feel it goes beyond just my own sphere."
Already tried scrying at it? Calling its power? What new knowledge comes from this new table? What heavens and hells are commanded by its power?
Mathematic tricks are cool, but some interesting answers for these questions would it make worth investigating. Otherwise, why bother?"Yes and no. I admit I'm not as skilled in skrying as I would want, but I have tried. Yes, I received "results", but again, this is subjective. Does it provide anything new? Good question, again I say yes, but I am not in a position to declare these, or understand them fully myself. Part of the reason I am Sharing it, is to get help in understanding it. Some of those here have a lot more knowledge and insight AND experience to decide this than me. That's part of why I ask everyone to look themselves. I'm sure, for example, Jim could get a LOT more out if it than me, or easily catch problems. But, whatever I get out of it isn't "evidence" really, because it is just "subjective" opinion, and MY take on it. I could be totally wrong, and yet this may not be proof either way, because it is MY subjective interpretation. This is why, I stuck to the numbers, and the symbolic consistency, since that is at least something objective we can agree on, since say "666" has meaning to us all according to our being magicians and of course Thelemites.
-
Well, I understand your position. I see no reason to worry to get confirmation. It is like what was once suggested about learning the name of your Angel, you simply keep doing the work assigned to your grade. There will be a time when you will be able to access this table and validate it.
I also understand why most people won’t bother to spend energy with it. The other tables we have do the job just fine, why should we need a new one? Can it be a better table? Sure! But it can be just a huge waste of time. Probably it won’t be a priority for them.
About the numbers, I never understood why Crowley spent so much time playing with them and saying that they prove something. They are the kind of thing that only makes sense inside the symbolic system he is using.
For example, I use the French set of attributions of Hebrew letters to the tarot. As a result of it I get some really cool ideas that those using thelema-golden dawn attributions do not. Are they proves that my set is better?
-
@Faus said
"Well, I understand your position. I see no reason to worry to get confirmation. It is like what was once suggested about learning the name of your Angel, you simply keep doing the work assigned to your grade. There will be a time when you will be able to access this table and validate it.
I also understand why most people won’t bother to spend energy with it. The other tables we have do the job just fine, why should we need a new one? Can it be a better table? Sure! But it can be just a huge waste of time. Probably it won’t be a priority for them.
About the numbers, I never understood why Crowley spent so much time playing with them and saying that they prove something. They are the kind of thing that only makes sense inside the symbolic system he is using.
For example, I use the French set of attributions of Hebrew letters to the tarot. As a result of it I get some really cool ideas that those using thelema-golden dawn attributions do not. Are they proves that my set is better?"
Of course, really, your right. In the end it only matters for the individual, and as you wisely say, later if it is to be it will be validated. But, if you discovered something (at least to you) that seemed to have value for your fellow Thelemites, and objective truth, what would you do? I chose to share it, if someone else also finds it helpful, useful in their work, or if by some chance it DOES have objective truth then its worth it. If no one cares, fine. Of course it bothers me that others may see me as some kook, or moron or whatever else they may say, but I cant be afraid of that, I truly believe in it. I truly, honestly believe it has something to it, so in that personal belief I bravely offer myself up. I believe in Thelema, if there's a chance I have anything to give our cause, then I'm going to give it regardless. No one has to accept it, we all know the Law.
As for the numbers etc., my only input is that I stick with what the Master Therion saw fit. It stands to reason he would know and use what worked and what was in alignment with that system. Yes, to some degree the numbers meanings are subjective, yet we ALL (even Bible thumping xtians) HAVE to nod to these numbers significance, historical significance, that by now are well known. These numbers and their relationship themselves stand to impress in themselves devoid of our subjective ideas.
-
Here is the completed Thelemic Tablet. It shows each square with the completed correspondences, Tarot number, English letters, English letter of Abrahadabra, and main element of division.
I use one framed like this in the East of my temple. Each square can be travelled into, or evoked by the 5 & 6 lettered name horizontal, ruled by the vertical for each square. These are, I believe, the "ordeals of her knowledge", the Worship about the secret house.
"Lurk! Withdraw! Upon them! this is the Law of the Battle of Conquest: thus shall my worship be about my secret house."
These, I believe, are the "islands" you choose, and fortify, and "dung about". This, to me anyway, is a war-engine.
-
My argument for Proof
The main arguement against this, actually the only one possible, being proof of a directing intelligence at work, is that its simply chance. However, this doesn't hold up, if you truly look at it. One cannot point to the comparison of the statistical likelihood of a "winning hand in poker", being directly equivalent to any other hand, since what sets this apart from that is prediction. It would be the same then if one were to be given a set of directions on how to arrive at random cards to obtain a significant result, and after doing so, out of a random deck, achieving a perfect hand. The prediction of a result, and then obtaining a result from following it, rules out this analogy of it being comparable to flipping a coin.
In addition, what is the statistical likelihood that these "random" results should align perfectly, by pure number no less, to the very source it was derived? One could try to argue that one sees a "pattern" or result they want to see, that through playing with the results, they eventually can find whatever they want. The problem with this explanation, while certainly true of some proposed solutions, is that there isn't much room for manipulation (really just 3 steps). The difference is in the direct manner the results are obtained, in a very limited fashion, and in the obvious number results obtained which leave very little room for ambiguity. After all, 666 & 418 are well known numbers to all Thelemites, and of course 666 to even most who aren't.
In addition, the sheer breadth of internal symbolic consistency adds to its validity. If one was asked to accept another "take" of what a number means, or symbolises in order for it to work, that would be a red flag, yet, here, we have numbers well known and mentioned openly within the Book of the Law, and the harmony of these findings with the overall meaning cannot be disputed. An example of this, again worth repeating, is the "foursquare" 666, which anyone with just a basic knowledge of magic and occult symbology, has to admit is perfectly at home within a square of 36 (which is already associated with the magical square of the Sun), and totalling to 666 by way of 6 lines totalling 111 (AUM HA 6x111). These are well beyond being a personal take or spin on an interpretation, these are established symbols used in the occult for decades.
If we also take into account other harmonies or coincidences, like the fact needing to fold the number sequence of 0 through 25 at 0 - 12 & 13 - 25, and it just so happens to perfectly agree with the Tarots macro/micro division, we of course strengthen this arguement. Likewise we arrive at the possibility of arriving at 666 & 418, through three repeated numbers: 5,14,23, which when seen as the number order of the Tarot and assigned English, and Greek, sum by some miracle in Greek and Hebrew to 666. Which again, in another way - this number is related to this solution, and in a manner unconnected to the actual numbers added, but instead through the arbitrary relationship of related Alphabet letter order.
Crowley could not have possibly created such a merging of factors, nor could he, if he fabricated it all, adding in the ciphers, known how these riddles would have inspired someone over a hundred years later to follow them. The fact that my chosen, interpretation of the verses and riddles, directed me to unlock these results, is proof that the author of them, was able to predict the future, and bring together various factors such as the inherent mathematical possibility for the results, as well as the seemingly random evolution of Alphabet, Tarot elements, as well as all the events that brought about the very significance of the numbers involved, to be just what AC described.
In the end, one has to conclude all of this is well beyond the possibility of pure chance, and admit all other possible scenerios are absurd, such as AC having found this before writing Liber L, and composing the riddles in some hope it is discovered later, and used as evidence. In order for this idea to work, you STILL have to overcome the problem of how it was there in the first place, knowing that these numbers were symbolically important even before him. It doesn't add up, and the only real counter claim, is that it is a freak of chance, but no where can anyone show a comparable result. Is there another such freak of nature? If so, where? To equate this with the idea of chance only holds up minus the area of prediction, and obvious, and agreed upon symbolic relevence and high consistency. The predictions lead to the results consistant with its inherent claim, and the symbology is consistant with the overall scheme of the predictions.
The method is simple, the results shocking, and it all is in alignment with the Book of the Law, Crowleys claim, and the riddles. All of this taken into account, I assert, sets it well above ANYTHING before -- there are NO other comparable examples. Its subtle, and takes time to allow all of these points come to light, and make sense, but when they do, its simply undeniable. I believe this is the proof mentioned in Liber L., and what joy and certainty would come from realizing the truth there IS Divine Providence, that all that occurs is as it should be, and we are indeed a part of something much greater than ourselves? AC made the prediction that within the new Aeon mankind would perhaps prove life beyond death, this would, seeing that it confirms the idea of a directing spiritual force, confirming the spiritual and magical model of the universe.
I always felt maybe the term "locked glass", referred to the computer screen, or perhaps the Internet, in that of course it goes out to the world, and miraculous color comes back to it year after year, where one could present this proof, closed then in locked glass as a proof to the world. So, I leave this here as my proof to the world, and hope others see its worth and power, seeing it as the pure Gold it is.
-
@Jason R said
" One cannot point to the comparison of the statistical likelihood of a "winning hand in poker", being directly equivalent to any other hand, since what sets this apart from that is prediction. It would be the same then if one were to be given a set of directions on how to arrive at random cards to obtain a significant result, and after doing so, out of a random deck, achieving a perfect hand. The prediction of a result, and then obtaining a result from following it, rules out this analogy of it being comparable to flipping a coin."
Except that the Book of the Law does not contain a specific prediction or a specific "set of directions" for achieving your results.
Your "directions" are based on an arbitrary interpretation of vague passages. For example, there's nothing in the "paste the sheets" line that suggests the tarot. You interpreted it as an instruction about the tarot, and you've found a way to follow your arbitrary intepretation that yields a result that seems meaningful. If it didn't yield a meaningful result, you wouldn't have said anything about it: you would have tried a different arbitrary interpretation and kept trying different combinations until you got something that seems meaningful. And on and on and on, until you got something.
That's the problem with what you're doing: you think you're following some "set of directions" given in the Book when in fact it's just an arbitrary interpretation of vague passages, which someone can keep doing until he gets an apparently meaningful result.
"In addition, what is the statistical likelihood that these "random" results should align perfectly, by pure number no less, to the very source it was derived?"
If you keep playing with numbers, you're eventually going to get numbers that are meaningful to you, even if they are meaningful to you because they meant something to Crowley.
" there isn't much room for manipulation (really just 3 steps)"
Three steps deriving from arbitrary interpretation. If they didn't yield anything, you could try a different arbitrary interpretation, and so on, until something produces apparently meaningful results.
"The fact that my chosen, interpretation of the verses and riddles, directed me to unlock these results, is proof that the author of them, was able to predict the future, and bring together various factors such as the inherent mathematical possibility for the results, as well as the seemingly random evolution of Alphabet, Tarot elements, as well as all the events that brought about the very significance of the numbers involved, to be just what AC described."
This is a complete non-sequitur. Even if you were right, that this really is a consciously-designed puzzle, and even if you were right that Crowley somehow couldn't have designed the puzzle -- two bald assertions that you have no valid grounds for -- it still wouldn't follow that the puzzle was therefore created by someone who has the ability to see the future.
It also would tell us nothing about the existence of "Divine Providence." After all, in a universe devoid of divine providence, there's nothing stopping a person from coming up with a cool number puzzle.
-
1. "No specific directions, only your interpretation of vague passages."
Except that it fits, and is a perfectly reasonable interpretation miraculously leading to an obvious result. In addition, these "vague passages" were obviously meant to be vague, and why? No doubt that is the very point, that from an individuals personal inspiration these "keys" would serve to unlock the hidden solution, perhaps at the proper time?
It really doesn't matter if the directions aren't perfectly clear does it? Like ANY riddle, its vague, and of course when the answer is revealed, what once was vague and strange springs to life and it all makes sense, in an "AHA!" moment. The fact that this solution does this, that looking at what it produces as a whole, and how perfectly it answers these riddles, is justification.
Can you then, demonstrate this point of yours? Show me such a "cool number game" with as much coherent symbolism. Ive already asked, and you still have yet to offer up a perfect example. I know your waiting excuse "ah why should I waste my time on such BS?"
2. "Keep playing with numbers and you'll eventually get the result your looking for."
-
I assigned the sequencing of the Tarot to the English.
-
I folded it, right to left & top to bottom.
-
I reduced.
-
I added it all up.
The simple four steps above provided half the sums of foursquare 666 in quadrants of 36, including 6 x 111. A central cross of 418. AND a pertinent arrangement of Tarot cards in a blending of Macro/Micro. All of this instantly, from the above four. How much toying again?
Four SIMPLE and straight forward steps. Define for me specifically, what you call "playing" or "toying"?
Explain where in my interpretation or decision I was illogical or unreasonable.
Can you, once again, provided something of comparable ease and with comparable results?
3. "It only means something to you because it meant something to AC."
Really. So tell me, 666 had meaning ONLY to Crowley? Not to mention 111, and 56, and 36, 25, and 50, not to other would be occultists, Qabalists, or even Bible thumpers for ages? And AGAIN I ask, define "toying", because the above four steps really do not amount to much hard, long hours of manipulation.
If your suggesting by "playing", that I kept at it, with other various interpretations and ideas, for example of what the directions meant, how does that make null and void the results? Much of discovery is made this way, unless you would fault trial and error? One usually tries various methods until something works, research usually obtains results this way, why not for riddle solving too? How else would you propose someone to solve it? Are you suggesting a riddle is null and void unless solved on the first try? Or that somehow, it doesn't count if someone simply guessed it? It HAS to be spelled out I suppose, in glorious detail like everything else in the occult, or science, or many other areas of life right? Oh, that's right, there IS no solution, because you say its impossible.
Its funny, because you actually contradict yourself with your own arguement as well. If you were right, and it was so easy to just create a solution such as this out of thin air, why hasn't anyone? We should see JUST as reasonable, and striking results in just as straight forward a manner a dozen a day. You tried you said, did YOU come up with any comparable solutions? If so, once again, I say prove me wrong, share it!
But you said it before "nobody has found anything." Well what then would you define as a solution? What YOU, and YOU only accept or expect as one? If it doesn't produce electricity and solve world hunger it isn't a solution just a "cool number game"? Have you taken into consideration your wrong in your understanding of the universe? That we are growing, in stages, and we need to solve particular things ourselves? This solution simply assists us in a further awakening, a new knowledge, in order to help us grow spiritually. By following this system, and magick, we actually change mankind through changing ourselves.
4. "No valid grounds for a being able to predict the future, or for AC not being able to consciously design this puzzle."
No valid grounds? How about your "critical thinking skills"? Explain how you justify this claim? What human being could arrange the order of Alphabets, the choice in Tarot numbering, mathematics to all come together to produce 666 & 418, as DIRECTLY predicted and described, not at all vaguely in Liber L? How COULD Crowley design it? Are you serious here, or being sarcastic? So AC could figure out how to make the four steps above result in 5,14,23 and those correspond to three Greek letters totalling 666, and so in and so on and so on? That's thinking even MORE of AC than the biggest AC "worshipper" could! Maybe secretly you DO believe he was our "Christ!" lol.
Look at this solution. It has what? Go ahead LOOK at it. Ill help by describing it in case you have bad vision, it is a square with FOUR quadrants adding to 666. FOUR quadrants around a CENTRAL cross of 418. Now, read this:
2:78 "...They shall worship thy name, foursquare, mystic, wonderful, the number of a man; and the name of thy house 418."
Or
**"I am in a secret fourfold word, the blasphemy against all gods of men."
"There are four gates to one palace..."**
Of course you will deny the blantant and obvious similarities for the sake of argument. That's Ok, others will decide, and see exactly what is right there in front of them.
I think its actually a real interesting prediction in Liber L as well, in the verses:
"Begone! ye mockers; even though ye laugh in my honour ye shall laugh not long: then when ye are sad know that I have forsaken you."
I think this fits pretty well with those who claim to be "Thelemites", and yet mock its very prophet. Those that, like traiters, seek to cast dispersion among its ranks, laughing it up, making fun of its power, and predictions, and so the validity of its Gods. Those with a "mission" to cleanse it or whst not. Interesting that the author, had enough foresight to add this, as if they knew certain folks would arise to challenge it, yet like it says "in my honour" -- that is right on the money boy!
I want to remind you to answer the above questions, and give me an example of this solution. Explain how YOU think chance can produce a complex design of symbolic consistency, TO MOST OCCULTISTS. This is something you subtly gloss over. It isn't simply MYSELF that sees these symbols and consistency, everyone does, or you wouldn't have called it "cool".
I do give you credit for your feedback and opinion, even if we do not agree, so thanks are in order, regardless. I admit, I'm sure many here have the same opinion, and so actually you provided me the oppertunity to answer these arguements.
-
-
@Jason R said
"1. "No specific directions, only your interpretation of vague passages."
Except that it fits"
That's not a response to my objection.
You specifically said that your results weren’t a simple matter of chance because you were following a “set of directions” in the Book itself.
My objection is that there isn’t a set of directions in the Book: just a bunch of vague stuff that can be interpreted into lots and lots of different “sets of instructions” which each could be followed lots and lots of different ways. I further pointed out that you could keep trying different “sets of directions” interpretations until you find one that fits.
You can’t respond sensibly to that by saying, “But I found one that fits!” because that doesn’t at all contradict what I was saying.
"In addition, these "vague passages" were obviously meant to be vague, and why? No doubt that is the very point, that from an individuals personal inspiration these "keys" would serve to unlock the hidden solution, perhaps at the proper time?"
I don’t agree that there’s “no doubt” about it. If there really were “no doubt,” we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
It might be, for example, that it’s just a bunch of vague sh!t that doesn’t mean anything in particular, that different people can interpret into different “sets of directions.” [I'm not saying that I, myself, am claiming that about these passages...but I'm presenting a real possibility that you cannot discount]
Now, you happened to invent an arbitrary set of directions and a way to fulfil that set of directions that gave you a cool-looking result. But that doesn’t tell us anything at all about the Book itself.
"Show me such a "cool number game" with as much coherent symbolism. Ive already asked, and you still have yet to offer up a perfect example."
Because it would take time and effort, which I don’t really have right now, especially not to prove a point that should be pretty simple to grasp, for the reasons I'm explaining to you.
"1. I assigned the sequencing of the Tarot to the English.
-
I folded it, right to left & top to bottom.
-
I reduced.
-
I added it all up.
The simple four steps above provided half the sums of foursquare 666 in quadrants of 36, including 6 x 111. A central cross of 418. AND a pertinent arrangement of Tarot cards in a blending of Macro/Micro. All of this instantly, from the above four. How much toying again?"
A ton of toying. First, you groundlessly assumed one randomly-chosen verse was talking about tarot cards, then you came up with a way of arranging them and adding up the numbers – arbitrarily choosing to make a graph out of them, and then you arbitrarily chose to make “squares” out of the results of that, and you found – in the midst of all of those arbitrary selections and calculations – numbers important to you and/or the system in which you are working.
That’s nothing but toying with numbers…there’s no justification for your arbitrary choices in the Book itself, and -- if this particular set of arbitrary choices didn't yield an interesting result -- you would have been free to keep arbitrarily interpreting the same passages in different ways and playing with numbers until you did get an interesting result.
Which is precisely what makes it not interesting.
"3. "It only means something to you because it meant something to AC.""
For the record, you’re both misquoting and misreading me here. What I said was: "you're eventually going to get numbers that are meaningful to you, even if they are meaningful to you because they meant something to Crowley."
What I meant was that your point, "But these numbers meant something to other people, like Crowley and other occultists!" doesn't change anything. Regardless of the reason you think these numbers are important, they are still generated through the same arbitrary means that I objected to above and to which you have not sufficiently responded.
"If your suggesting by "playing", that I kept at it, with other various interpretations and ideas, for example of what the directions meant, how does that make null and void the results?"
As I explained above, when you’re just trying out different arbitrary “sets of directions,” what you’re doing is trying out all kinds of ways of playing with numbers that have practically no basis at all in the text in question.
Eventually, you’re going to get results that seem impressive. And that's precisely what makes them not impressive.
" If you were right, and it was so easy to just create a solution such as this out of thin air, why hasn't anyone?"
There is no end of people with super-duper “solutions” to Liber AL riddles. Surely you’ll say that their results aren’t as impressive as yours, and they’ll say that yours aren’t as impressive as theirs. Honestly, to me, it’s all a bunch of silly noodling.
"4. "No valid grounds for a being able to predict the future, or for AC not being able to consciously design this puzzle."
No valid grounds? How about your "critical thinking skills"? Explain how you justify this claim?"
Because you were claiming that something had created a number puzzle and that you had solved it...nothing about that claim implies that the author of the puzzle could see the future, and nothing about it implies that there is some kind of "Divine Providence."
Those are both complete non-sequiturs on your part.
Even if we grant your claims that there really is a consciously-designed puzzle here and that the author of these puzzles couldn't be a normal human -- for which I see no support whatsoever -- it still wouldn't imply that the author could see the future or that there was Divine Providence.
You can have a go at trying to explain why these things necessarily follow from your claim.
"Explain how YOU think chance can produce a complex design of symbolic consistency, TO MOST OCCULTISTS."
Because a person can play number games with any sufficiently long text, especially if he just randomly interprets parts of the text to be talking about other systems like the tarot.
Some of those number games will yield cool results, but it tells us nothing about the original text.
-
-
If one gives you a riddle say, for example "what is greater than God, worse than the devil, rich people don't want it, poor people have it, and if you eat it you'll die?"
Its vague, just clues one has to piece together to solve it, that's the point of a riddle, or cipher. When we solve it, by saying Oh - its "nothing!" Then, looking back at those puzzling clues make perfect sense, and you have no "doubt". My original point was these riddles pointed me in the right direction, to me at least, and the Book is to be taken as unique to all, it was a specific set of directions, based on what I saw them to be.
Is it not strange, or rather very unlikely, that my interpretation led to such a startling result? Again, which you simple breeze over and ignored, you discount the EASE of which it is revealed. Yes, I did try other methods, but, again, your argument this will eventually produce such results is absurd. That may work as an explanation if I was going way out on a limb with my interpretation, my methods unreasonable and complex, and unagreed upon as logical, but they aren't.
Again, it is my argument that, so what if I used trial and error, that in fact goes against your theory, as there was at least failed attempts to "find" anything, no patterns I "wanted to see" found. It seems rather illogical to deny a solution based on the fact one searched tor it, as absurd as refusing the above answer to the riddle given. The solution must be then judged on ITS own merits, in how logical, and sound its technique was, and how fitting the results. The same reason applies to the simplified analogy of the solution to the riddle above. We know it was the "right" answer based on if it makes sense in the context, and not how long they took, or their trial and error in figuring it out. In fact, it would be impossible to solve a riddle without "toying", and how would we know we were right? Yet, of course once the answer is "found" we "know it".
There was ONE foundational verse, or "direction" that led to this result, and that was the "pasting the sheets". It is perfectly logical to take these as the pages of the Book of Thoth, or Nuit's "Book", which in Liber L, she even uses the phrase "my book". Not too much of a stretch. Many Thelemites agree with Frater Achad's "key" to the Book of the Law - "Al", and do we deny this, and why not? Why was THAT considered, even by AC, well after parting ways with him, to be valid? Whether or not anyone excepts it is not important, the important point is they obviously disagree with your point here, since THAT "solution" was based on the same sort of reasoning.
This result, even though there are many "English Qabalah" solutions, stands apart in that it is backed up by numerous verses in similarities, as well as the universal workability and numerical consistency. Many of the EQ systems seem to have a whole other set of number symbolism, yet this aligned with what is already established. Besides, who cares if there are? This does not preclude this idea anyway.
As I said, I predicted your excuse, and that's what it is, because you cannot produce this "delusion" yourself. You wont, because you cant, you cannot produce or create ANYTHING in this straight forward and logical a manner, nor with as much consistency, with the two great Thelemic numbers. In addition, it being relevant and including coincidentally the two great systems used by AC - Enochian and the Tarot.
If it is impossible to at all come close, with another example, then how can it simply be a mental construct, or some pattern easily came up with by "toying long enough"? BTW, I found this after TWO attempts, one evening in about an hour. Not a whole lot of hours, days, weeks, months, or years "playing around" to discover it. So your flat out wrong there. Most of the supporting verses I quote came well AFTER I discovered the numbers, and then I realized it was further supported. One verse, one hour. Years were spent simply on understanding it, and further exploration, but the basic idea came quickly.
It wasn't me flipping through pages, adding up words, or trying various approaches to various verses buddy. I didn't even try to "solve" anything, except when the idea popped in when reading about the "sheets", that what if it was talking about the pages of the Book of Thoth? So this imaginary fantasy of yours, that I was toying around like that is not at all what happened.
One last point, the whole Tablet actually is created in TWO steps, and the 666 results etc., really do not come into play.
-
Apply Tarot sequence to English.
-
Divide in half and add.
That generates the blending of the cards, and the Tablet. Yes, of COURSE I decided to create a Tablet, what else, in this Tarot arrangement is suggested otherwise? I was inspired by the further words "paste" and "behold", one doesn't need much to "get" what this set up could be doing (dividing by 5 & 6). In any event, regardless, the fact I was inspired to try something, is a personal influence the verses had on me, that led to an objective result with a very valid and reasonable outcome.
Your argument is strangely centered only on my methods and chance at obtaining it, and not the actual product. Is there an argument on the actual Tablet itself? I feel the Tablet has a wealth of interesting details that point to a great depth of meaning, all further in alignment with Thelema.
Your argument that I simply "found what I wanted" is weak based on the limited amount if steps, AND time involved, AND how a persons could "manipulate" these results to be what they wanted. Yes, 666, is important to occultists, but I think it is very unlikely TWO of the great Thelemic numbers just pop up in a calculation TOGETHER, which just happen to also pop up in the BOL.
These factors happen TOGETHER, within ONE calculation.
-
666 & 418 arise from a simple calculation together, within the same calculation.
-
Both these numbers in combination are recorded and mentioned in the text this "arbitrary" calculation was derived.
-
There is still a further, unconnected 666 derived from the three numbers 5,14,23 that relate to these numbers Greek Alphabet orders as well.
-
Divisions produced by significant numbers reflecting the connected system to Thelema, the Enochian.
-
Tarot combinations, of further symbolic Thelemic harmony.
The above suggest something highly highly unlikely, and I say impossible to occur taken in conjunction. The statistical probability must be so unlikely that they demonstrate the proof I'm asserting.
-
-
@Jason R said
"There was ONE foundational verse, or "direction" that led to this result, and that was the "pasting the sheets". It is perfectly logical to take these as the pages of the Book of Thoth"
There's nothing in the text to suggest that this refers to the tarot, that (even if it were a reference to the tarot) it's a reference to the major arcana plus the four suits, that it's an instruction to lay out the cards as a grid, that it's an instruction to assign numbers to the cards, that it's an instruction to "reduce" these numbers, that it's an instruction to add them, that it's an instruction to produce "squares" and a "tablet."
All of those things are incredibly arbitrary choices that have nothing to do with the original verse.
You took one vague phrase, which could be twisted into lots of different sets of instructions, chose one of these sets of instructions, and, after performing operations with numbers under one version of that set, produced a bunch of numbers that were significant to Crowley. All of that tells us nothing about the original vague phrase.
I think that you and I have gone about as far as we can go on this point. Unless you have anything new to add, we'll just have to let readers make up their own minds what your number games say -- if anything -- about the Book of the Law.
-
@Los said
"
@Jason R said
"There was ONE foundational verse, or "direction" that led to this result, and that was the "pasting the sheets". It is perfectly logical to take these as the pages of the Book of Thoth"There's nothing in the text to suggest that this refers to the tarot, that (even if it were a reference to the tarot) it's a reference to the major arcana plus the four suits, that it's an instruction to lay out the cards as a grid, that it's an instruction to assign numbers to the cards, that it's an instruction to "reduce" these numbers, that it's an instruction to add them, that it's an instruction to produce "squares" and a "tablet."
All of those things are incredibly arbitrary choices that have nothing to do with the original verse.
You took one vague phrase, which could be twisted into lots of different sets of instructions, chose one of these sets of instructions, and, after performing operations with numbers under one version of that set, produced a bunch of numbers that were significant to Crowley. All of that tells us nothing about the original vague phrase.
I think that you and I have gone about as far as we can go on this point. Unless you have anything new to add, we'll just have to let readers make up their own minds what your number games say -- if anything -- about the Book of the Law."
Oh except the further clues that clearly mention the English Alphabet (you know "ORDER & VALUE"), and further "keys" that helped unlock it, you know, the ones on the page of the original Ms., with a strange GRAPH drawn on it as well? Hmmm, interesting, a GRAPH on the page discussing "keys" (clues) to a puzzle.
Of course the verse was the main foundation, or starting point for the idea, refined easily by what other clues were given. Wasn't hard, and the obvious suggestion one gets from this idea is BLENDING the 5 & 6, since of course the Tarot is divided up onto two halves as such. Doesn't take a genius really to put it together.
You STILL, I see avoid my main point I explained; which is how the factors described (regardless of my interpretation) could just be chance? Statistical probability that such a logical, reasonable, solution to the riddle, could produce in ONE calculation:
- 666,418, & 111
- 5,14,23 at same time as above numbers being the order numbers for Greek letters totalling to 666
- That these numbers are all in Liber L together, as in this single calculation result.
- And at same instant have complete Thelemic symbolic consistency.
- Resemble the familiar divisions bore out by these numbers to the Enochian scheme.
AND once again, remind everyone, you STILL refuse (and cannot) give me even ONE comparable example of this so called contrived, arbitrary, imaginary "number game."Plus it DOES provide much to the elucidation of Liber L., starting with THIS TABLET being the "secret house", "one palace" with "four gates", "a secret fourfold word", and a EQ! Its ALL right there if you look.
Just not so easy is it bud? Yes, I'm sure they can decide. Thanks again!